Abstract
Objectives Olfactory dysfunction is a major comorbidity observed in patients with multiple sclerosis, yet different prevalence rates are reported for it. Therefore, we have designed this systematic review to estimate the pooled prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in patients with MS. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in MS patients.
Method We searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, ProQuest, and gray literature including references from the identified studies, review studies, and conference abstracts which were published up to January 2021. Articles that were relevant to our topic and could provide information regarding the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction, or the scores of smell threshold, discrimination, or identification (TDI scores) among MS patients and healthy individuals were included; however, articles published before 1990 and after the end of 2020 were excluded.
Results The literature search found 1630 articles. After eliminating duplicates, 897 articles remained. two abstract conference papers were included for final analysis. A total of 1099 MS cases and 299 MS patients with olfactory dysfunction were included in the analysis. The pooled prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the included studies was 27.2%. (95% CI: [19.7%, 35.4%]) Also, the overall TDI score in MS patients was lower than that in the control group (SMD=-1.00; 95% CI: [−1.44, −0.56]), and the level of Threshold (SMD= −0.47; 95% CI: [−0.75, −0.19]), Discrimination (SMD=-0.53; 95% CI: [−0.96, −0.10]), and Identification (SMD=-1.02; 95% CI: [−1.36, −0.68]) per se were lower in MS compared with control respectively.
Conclusion The results of this systematic review shows that the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in MS patients is high and more attention needs to be drawn to this aspect of MS.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not applicable
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
(omid.mirmosayyeb{at}gmail.com)
(nargesebrahimiy{at}gmail.com)
(barzegar_mahdi73{at}yahoo.com)
(alireza.afsharisafavi{at}gmail.com)
(sarabagherieh20{at}gmail.com)
(v.shaygannejad{at}gmail.com)
Funding: none
Conflict of interest: none to be declared Ethical considerations: not applicable Consent to participate: not applicable
Consent for publication: not applicable
Availability of data and material: All of the data will be available for secondary analysis in necessary cases from the corresponding author through an email address.
Code availability: not applicable
Data Availability
All of the data will be available for secondary analysis in necessary cases from the corresponding author through an email address.