These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23232200)

  • 1. A novel test to differentiate anosmic malingerers from actually anosmic patients.
    Mehdizade J; Saedi B; Fotouhi R; Safavi A
    Am J Rhinol Allergy; 2012; 26(6):485-8. PubMed ID: 23232200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. What a tangled web we weave: discriminating between malingering and anosmia.
    Kurtz DB; White TL; Hornung DE; Belknap E
    Chem Senses; 1999 Dec; 24(6):697-700. PubMed ID: 10587503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. How Many and Which Odor Identification Items Are Needed to Establish Normal Olfactory Function?
    Lötsch J; Ultsch A; Hummel T
    Chem Senses; 2016 May; 41(4):339-44. PubMed ID: 26857742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Scratch density differentiates microsmic from normosmic and anosmic subjects on the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test.
    Doty RL; Genow A; Hummel T
    Percept Mot Skills; 1998 Feb; 86(1):211-6. PubMed ID: 9530735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Correspondence between three olfactory tests and suprathreshold odor intensity ratings.
    Koskinen S; Vento S; Malmberg H; Tuorila H
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2004 Nov; 124(9):1072-7. PubMed ID: 15513552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A short olfactory test based on the identification of three odors.
    Hummel T; Pfetzing U; Lötsch J
    J Neurol; 2010 Aug; 257(8):1316-21. PubMed ID: 20232208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The influence of distractors on odor identification.
    Gudziol V; Hummel T
    Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2009 Feb; 135(2):143-5. PubMed ID: 19221241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Gustatory olfactory function test with the Güttich technique: an evaluation of the clinical value].
    Hummel T; Rosenheim K; Knecht M; Heilmann S; Mürbe D; Hüttenbrink KB
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1999 Nov; 78(11):627-31. PubMed ID: 10615657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Utility of a three-item smell identification test in detecting olfactory dysfunction.
    Jackman AH; Doty RL
    Laryngoscope; 2005 Dec; 115(12):2209-12. PubMed ID: 16369168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical significance of results from olfactory testing.
    Gudziol V; Lötsch J; Hähner A; Zahnert T; Hummel T
    Laryngoscope; 2006 Oct; 116(10):1858-63. PubMed ID: 17003712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A pilot study of the Self-Administered Computerized Olfactory Testing System.
    Jiang RS; Liang KL
    Am J Rhinol Allergy; 2015; 29(2):e55-8. PubMed ID: 25785744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of the efficacy of the 'nasal airflow-inducing manoeuvre' for smell rehabilitation in laryngectomees by means of the Sniffin' Sticks test.
    Haxel BR; Fuchs C; Fruth K; Mann WJ; Lippert BM
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2011 Feb; 36(1):17-23. PubMed ID: 21244643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. New Modification of Smell Identification Test for the Detection of Malingerers: A Pilot Experimental Study.
    Erfanian R; Taherkhani S; Abdullah H; Sohrabpour S; Emami H; Hoorang M; Amirzargar B
    Iran J Med Sci; 2022 May; 47(3):248-255. PubMed ID: 35634524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Identifying normosmics: a comparison of two populations.
    Heywood PG; Costanzo RM
    Am J Otolaryngol; 1986; 7(3):194-9. PubMed ID: 3728827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Separating normosmic and anosmic patients based on entropy evaluation of olfactory event-related potentials.
    Güdücü C; Olcay BO; Schäfer L; Aziz M; Schriever VA; Özgören M; Hummel T
    Brain Res; 2019 Apr; 1708():78-83. PubMed ID: 30537519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of visual information and test paradigm on clinical olfactory test results.
    Kobayashi M; Imanishi Y; Ishikawa M; Nishida K; Oishi M; Nakamura S; Sakaida H; Maeda T; Tsunoda T; Matsuura T; Majima Y
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2008 Mar; 35(1):53-60. PubMed ID: 17869045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Australian norms for a quantitative olfactory function test.
    Mackay-Sim A; Grant L; Owen C; Chant D; Silburn P
    J Clin Neurosci; 2004 Nov; 11(8):874-9. PubMed ID: 15519866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessing olfactory function in laryngectomees using the Sniffin'Sticks test battery and chemosensory evoked potentials.
    Welge-Luessen A; Kobal G; Wolfensberger M
    Laryngoscope; 2000 Feb; 110(2 Pt 1):303-7. PubMed ID: 10680934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Risk factors for hazardous events in olfactory-impaired patients.
    Pence TS; Reiter ER; DiNardo LJ; Costanzo RM
    JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2014 Oct; 140(10):951-5. PubMed ID: 25170573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Detecting malingerers by means of response-sequence analysis.
    Linschoten MR; Harvey LO
    Percept Psychophys; 2004 Oct; 66(7):1190-201. PubMed ID: 15751475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.