This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

48/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Introduction Basic studies suggest that olfactory dysfunction and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) can be used as tools for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI); however, real-world evidence is lacking. We investigated the potential diagnostic efficacy of olfactory-stimulated fNIRS for early detection of MCI and/or Alzheimer disease (AD). Methods We conducted a patient-level, single-group, diagnostic interventional trial involving elderly volunteers (age >60 years) suspected of declining cognitive function. Patients received open-label olfactory-stimulated fNIRS for measurement of oxygenation difference in the orbitofrontal cortex. All participants underwent amyloid PET, MRI, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB). Results Of 97 subjects, 28 (28.9%) were cognitively normal, 32 (33.0%) had preclinical AD, 21 (21.6%) had MCI, and 16 (16.5%) had AD. Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation differences in the orbitofrontal cortex were associated with cognitive impairment; the association was more pronounced with cognitive severity. Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation difference was associated with MMSE (adjusted β [aβ] 1.001; 95% CI 0.540-1.463), SNSB language and related function (aβ, 1.218; 95% CI, 0.020-2.417), SNSB memory (aβ, 1.963; 95% CI, 0.841-3.084), SNSB frontal/executive function (aβ, 1.715; 95% CI, 0.401-3.029) scores, standard uptake value ratio from amyloid PET (aβ, -10.083; 95% CI, -19.063 to -1.103), and hippocampal volume from MRI (aβ, 0.002; 95% CI, 0.001-0.004). Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation difference in the orbitofrontal cortex was superior in diagnosing MCI and AD (AUC, 0.909; 95% CI, 0.848-0.971), compared to amyloid PET (AUC, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.694-0.893) or MRI (AUC, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.644-0.871). Discussion Our trial showed that olfactory-stimulated oxygenation differences in the orbitofrontal cortex detected by fNIRS were associated with cognitive impairment and cognitive-related objectives. This novel approach may be a potential diagnostic tool for patients with MCI and/or AD. Trial registration CRIS number, KCT0006197 .

Key findings

Introduction Basic studies suggest that olfactory dysfunction and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) can be used as tools for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI); however, real-world evidence is lacking.
Results Of 97 subjects, 28 (28.9%) were cognitively normal, 32 (33.0%) had preclinical AD, 21 (21.6%) had MCI, and 16 (16.5%) had AD.
Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation differences in the orbitofrontal cortex were associated with cognitive impairment; the association was more pronounced with cognitive severity.
Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation difference was associated with MMSE (adjusted β [aβ] 1.001; 95% CI 0.540-1.463), SNSB language and related function (aβ, 1.218; 95% CI, 0.020-2.417), SNSB memory (aβ, 1.963; 95% CI, 0.841-3.084), SNSB frontal/executive function (aβ, 1.715; 95% CI, 0.401-3.029) scores, standard uptake value ratio from amyloid PET (aβ, -10.083; 95% CI, -19.063 to -1.103), and hippocampal volume from MRI (aβ, 0.002; 95% CI, 0.001-0.004).
Olfactory-stimulated oxygenation difference in the orbitofrontal cortex was superior in diagnosing MCI and AD (AUC, 0.909; 95% CI, 0.848-0.971), compared to amyloid PET (AUC, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.694-0.893) or MRI (AUC, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.644-0.871).

Why it matters

In this single-group trial of 97 people, a measure of brain oxygenation during smelling was linked to cognitive impairment and cognitive test scores. The study was small and open-label, and it only tests a possible diagnostic tool, not any treatment, cure, or prevention.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →

Study details

Study designopen-label trial
Participants97
Effect size28.9%; 33.0%; 21.6%
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 48/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Alzheimer s Research & Therapy: journal h-index 146 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	Design recorded as “open-label trial”, which our rubric does not rank (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	1 / 4	97 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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	3 / 7	Cited 31 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	5.2 citations a year over 6 year(s) since 2022
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 4.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	1 / 6	Cited by 2 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 21 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Jae Gwan Kim: h-index 31 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Seoul National University: institution h-index 1,053 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35260170)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	48 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Kim, J., Yon, D. K., Choi, K. Y., Lee, J. J., Kim, N., Lee, K. H., et al. (2022). Novel diagnostic tools for identifying cognitive impairment using olfactory-stimulated functional near-infrared spectroscopy: patient-level, single-group, diagnostic trial. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-022-00978-w

Vancouver

Kim J, Yon DK, Choi KY, Lee JJ, Kim N, Lee KH, et al. Novel diagnostic tools for identifying cognitive impairment using olfactory-stimulated functional near-infrared spectroscopy: patient-level, single-group, diagnostic trial. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2022. doi:10.1186/s13195-022-00978-w. PMID: 35260170.

BibTeX

@article{kim2022-35260170,
  author  = {Kim, J. and Yon, D. K. and Choi, K. Y. and Lee, J. J. and Kim, N. and Lee, K. H. and Kim, J. G.},
  title   = {{Novel diagnostic tools for identifying cognitive impairment using olfactory-stimulated functional near-infrared spectroscopy: patient-level, single-group, diagnostic trial}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1186/s13195-022-00978-w},
  pmid    = {35260170},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-022-00978-w}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Novel diagnostic tools for identifying cognitive impairment using olfactory-stimulated functional near-infrared spectroscopy: patient-level, single-group, diagnostic trial

Key findings

Why it matters

Study details

Read the original

APA 7th

Vancouver

BibTeX

Studies this one cites

Later studies that cite this one

Related studies in Biomarkers

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers