Abstract
The infectiousness and presymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 hinder pandemic control efforts worldwide. Therefore, the frequency of testing, accessibility, and immediate results are critical for reopening societies until an effective vaccine becomes available for a substantial proportion of the population. The loss of sense of smell is among the earliest, most discriminant, and prevalent symptoms of COVID-19, with 75-98% prevalence when clinical olfactory tests are used. Frequent screening for olfactory dysfunction could substantially reduce viral spread. However, olfactory dysfunction is generally self-reported, which is problematic as partial ol-factory impairment is broadly unrecognized. To address this limitation, we developed a rapid psychophysical olfactory test (KOR) deployed on a web platform for automated reporting and traceability based on a low-cost (about USD 0.50/test), six-odor olfactory identification kit. Based on test results, we defined an anosmia score –a classifier for olfactory impairment–, and a Bayesian Network (BN) model that incorporates other symptoms for detecting COVID-19. We trained and validated the BN model on two samples: suspected COVID-19 cases in five healthcare centers (n = 926; 32% COVID-19 prevalence) and healthy (asymptomatic) mining workers (n = 1, 365; 1.1% COVID-19 prevalence). All participants had COVID-19 assessment by RT-PCR assay. Using the BN model, we predicted COVID-19 status with 76% accuracy (AUC=0.79 [0.75 − 0.82]) in the healthcare sample and 84% accuracy (AUC=0.71 [0.63 − 0.79]) among miners. The KOR test and BN model enabled the detection of COVID-19 cases that otherwise appeared asymptomatic. Our results confirmed that olfactory dysfunction is the most discriminant symptom to predict COVID-19 status when based on olfactory function measurements. Overall, this work highlights the potential for low-cost, frequent, accessible, routine testing for COVID-19 surveillance to aid society’s reopening.
Competing Interest Statement
DICTUC SA. has interest in commercial application of the olfactory test. E.A. is an advisor for DICTUC SA. C.V. and C.L. are employed by DICTUC SA.
Clinical Trial
This prospective study was not performed under a clinical setting and thus it was not registered in internationally recognized trial registries.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by the Technological Adoption Fund SiEmpre from SOFOFA Hub (CORFO), and partially funded by ANID through the Millennium Science Initiative Program ICN17_002 to S.E., P.B. and M.A.; ANID Millennium Science Initiative Program NCN17_081 and ANID/FONDAP CIGIDEN 15110017 to EU; Fondecyt 1200146 to S.E; and Fondecyt de Iniciacion 11190871 to PS.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The ethics committee of the Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, who is the academic entity overseeing clinical studies in the UC-Christus health care centers, has approved the execution of this study. The conditions under which this study was approved are the following: 1. Patient personal data is private and will not be disclosed. 2. Patient clinical data must be anonymized for the study. 2. Patients are all informed about the features and application protocol of the olfactory test. All patients must sign the appropriate consent for a non-invasive medical test upon application.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
We have made some modifications to the article based on suggestions from scientific reviewers. The main results of the paper have not changed, but only some specific parts that required more details (e.g., test specification). Some of these details are available in a revised version of the Supplementary Material.
Data Availability
The required data to reproduce the results of this study have been deposited in Mendeley Data and can be freely downloaded from the link provided.
