Home › Research › Risk factors
Differences in Odor Identification in Early-Onset and Late-Onset Depression
Meiling Liu, Ben Chen, Xiaomei Zhong, Min Zhang, Qiang Wang, Huarong Zhou, Zhangying Wu, Le Hou et al.. Brain sciences, 2022-02-16
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
LOD patients exhibited lower OI scores than EOD patients and normal controls (NCs). Additionally, the LOD patients exhibited a higher percentage of OI dysfunction than the EOD patients. Moreover, OI scores were associated with global cognition, memory, language, and visuospatial ability in the EOD group (p < 0.05) but were not associated with any cognitive score in the LOD patients (p > 0.05). Finally, the scores of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test Immediate recall and Boston Naming Test exhibited a partially mediating effect on the difference in OI scores between the EOD and LOD patients. (4) LOD patients exhibited worse OI than EOD patients, and their difference in OI was mediated by their memory and language function.
Key findings
- LOD patients exhibited lower OI scores than EOD patients and normal controls (NCs).
- Additionally, the LOD patients exhibited a higher percentage of OI dysfunction than the EOD patients.
- Moreover, OI scores were associated with global cognition, memory, language, and visuospatial ability in the EOD group (p < 0.05) but were not associated with any cognitive score in the LOD patients (p > 0.05).
- Finally, the scores of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test Immediate recall and Boston Naming Test exhibited a partially mediating effect on the difference in OI scores between the EOD and LOD patients.
- (4) LOD patients exhibited worse OI than EOD patients, and their difference in OI was mediated by their memory and language function.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants179
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 50/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Brain sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 179 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35204039) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 28 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100. |
| Total | 50 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Liu, M., Chen, B., Zhong, X., Zhang, M., Wang, Q., Zhou, H., et al. (2022). Differences in Odor Identification in Early-Onset and Late-Onset Depression. Brain sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12020276
Vancouver
Liu M, Chen B, Zhong X, Zhang M, Wang Q, Zhou H, et al. Differences in Odor Identification in Early-Onset and Late-Onset Depression. Brain sciences. 2022. doi:10.3390/brainsci12020276. PMID: 35204039.
BibTeX
@article{liu2022-35204039,
author = {Liu, Meiling and Chen, Ben and Zhong, Xiaomei and Zhang, Min and Wang, Qiang and Zhou, Huarong and Wu, Zhangying and Hou, Le and others},
title = {{Differences in Odor Identification in Early-Onset and Late-Onset Depression}},
journal = {Brain sciences},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.3390/brainsci12020276},
pmid = {35204039},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12020276}
}