Test-retest reliability and validity of the Importance of Olfaction Questionnaire in Denmark.
Daniel Tchemerinsky Konieczny; Alexander Wieck Fjaeldstad; Kristian Sandberg · 2024 · PLoS ONE
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract
While measures to detect psychophysical olfactory ability are a crucial part of clinicians' assessment of potential olfactory loss, it gives no indication of how olfaction is experienced by the patient and these different aspects often deviate substantially. To ensure quality and reproducibility of subjectively reported olfactory experience and significance, the Importance of Olfaction Questionnaire (IO-Q) was introduced around a decade ago, and while initial validations have produced promising results, important aspects remain nearly unexamined. For example, the test-retest reliability has ra
Abstract by Daniel Tchemerinsky Konieczny; Alexander Wieck Fjaeldstad; Kristian Sandberg, PLoS ONE (2024) — licensed CC BY 4.0.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
A Randomized Trial of Intraarterial Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Negative / Null Result ReportDuodenal Infusion of Donor Feces for Recurrent Clostridium difficile
Negative / Null Result ReportStenting versus Endarterectomy for Treatment of Carotid-Artery Stenosis
Negative / Null Result ReportEffects of Combination Lipid Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Replication FailureA Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma
Negative / Null Result ReportSpironolactone for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: DOAJ · DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0269211