Skip Navigation



Chemical Senses Advance Access published online on April 10, 2009
Chemical Senses, doi:10.1093/chemse/bjp018
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/5/435    most recent
bjp018v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krantz, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by Cruickshanks, K.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krantz, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by Cruickshanks, K.J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Test–Retest Reliability of the San Diego Odor Identification Test and Comparison with the Brief Smell Identification Test

Elizabeth M. Krantz1, C.R. Schubert1, D.S. Dalton1, W. Zhong2, G.H. Huang2,3, B.E.K. Klein1, R. Klein1, F.J. Nieto2 and K.J. Cruickshanks1

1 Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences 2 Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI 53726, USA 3 Institute of Statistics, National Chiao Tung University, 1001 Ta Hsuch Road, Hsinchu 30010, Taiwan

Correspondence to be sent to: Elizabeth M. Krantz, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Room 1048, 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI 53726, USA. e-mail: krantz{at}episense.wisc.edu


  Abstract

This study described the San Diego Odor Identification Test (SDOIT) reliability and compared the SDOIT and the Brief Smell Identification Test (B-SIT). Ninety participants aged 50–70 years completed this 2-visit olfaction study. During visit 1, the SDOIT and B-SIT were administered according to standard protocols. Three weeks later, participants returned to retake the SDOIT. The SDOIT score was the total number of odorants correctly identified out of 8 odorants presented, and olfactory impairment was defined as correctly identifying less than 6 odorants. The B-SIT score was the total number of odorants correctly identified out of 12 odorants presented, and participants correctly identifying less than 9 odorants were categorized as abnormal. The SDOIT reliability was high (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79–0.91). The same score was obtained on retest for 73% of participants, whereas 18% improved, and 9% declined. Test–retest agreement was 96% for the SDOIT; 4% improved from impaired at visit 1 to unimpaired at visit 2. Overall, SDOIT impairment classification and B-SIT abnormal classification agreed in 96% of participants ({kappa} = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.63–0.99). In conclusion, the SDOIT showed good test–retest reliability. Agreement for impaired/abnormal olfaction was demonstrated for the SDOIT and the B-SIT.

Key words: epidemiology, impairment, methods, olfaction

Accepted 13 March 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.