Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Neuroscience›Smell
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Smell

Neuroscience · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-29 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 3 min read

The ability to detect scents or odors, such as the function of olfactory receptor neurons.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (646 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

The ability to detect scents or odors, such as the function of olfactory receptor neurons.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Olfaction; Sense of Smell; Smell Sense.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Sensation
See also
Olfaction Disorders

Related concepts

  • Olfactory Receptor Neurons

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 20,075 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Smell” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 4,369 of them (21.8%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 5,657 records.

Reviews account for 2,232 records (11.1%) and meta-analyses for 100. Randomized controlled trials number 360 (1.8%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 5,657 records; 2000-2009: 4,631 records; 2010-2019: 5,418 records; 2020 onward: 4,369 records5,657through 19994,6312000-20095,4182010-20194,3692020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19995,657
2000-20094,631
2010-20195,418
2020 onward4,369
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 11.1 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.5 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 1.8 percentReviews11.1% (2,232)Meta-analyses0.5% (100)Randomized controlled trials1.8% (360)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 20,075 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews2,23211.1%
Meta-analyses1000.5%
Randomized controlled trials3601.8%

Method: PubMed query "Smell"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.

Reading the evidence in neuroscience

Neuroscience draws on tools with different strengths: cellular and animal work can manipulate circuits directly, while human imaging and electrophysiology observe the living brain at lower resolution. Small imaging studies are prone to false positives, and findings in animals do not always carry over to people. Clinical neurology and psychiatry rely on trials and cohort studies whose outcomes are often symptom scales. Check the species, the sample size, how the outcome was measured and whether results were replicated.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Nature and human well-being: The olfactory pathway
Bratman GN, Bembibre C, Daily GC, Doty RL, Hummel T, Jacobs LF, et al.
2024Review article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
41cc by
PMID 38748806 · DOI · PMC11809653
What Does the Human Olfactory System Do, and How Does It Do It?
Dikeçligil GN, Gottfried JA
2024Review article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
33cc by
PMID 37788573 · DOI · PMC12931680
High-speed odor sensing using miniaturized electronic nose
Dennler N, Drix D, Warner TPA, Rastogi S, Casa CD, Ackels T, et al.
2024Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
31cc by
PMID 39504378 · DOI · PMC11540037
Control of innate olfactory valence by segregated cortical amygdala circuits
Howe JR, Chan CL, Lee D, Blanquart M, Lee JH, Decoster L, et al.
2026Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
8cc by
PMID 41870253 · DOI · PMC13008359

Nature and human well-being: The olfactory pathway [1]

Review article Bratman GN, Bembibre C, Daily GC, Doty RL, Hummel T, Jacobs LF, et al. · · 2024 · cited 41 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
The world is undergoing massive atmospheric and ecological change, driving unprecedented challenges to human well-being.
Closing excerpt
We then discuss how this framework can contribute to better accounting of the impacts of policy and land-use decision-making on natural olfactory environments and, in turn, on planetary health.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (159 words)

The world is undergoing massive atmospheric and ecological change, driving unprecedented challenges to human well-being. Olfaction is a key sensory system through which these impacts occur. The sense of smell influences quality of and satisfaction with life, emotion, emotion regulation, cognitive function, social interactions, dietary choices, stress, and depressive symptoms. Exposures via the olfactory pathway can also lead to (anti-)inflammatory outcomes. Increased understanding is needed regarding the ways in which odorants generated by nature (i.e., natural olfactory environments) affect human well-being. With perspectives from a range of health, social, and natural sciences, we provide an overview of this unique sensory system, four consensus statements regarding olfaction and the environment, and a conceptual framework that integrates the olfactory pathway into an understanding of the effects of natural environments on human well-being. We then discuss how this framework can contribute to better accounting of the impacts of policy and land-use decision-making on natural olfactory environments and, in turn, on planetary health.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 38748806 · DOI · PMC11809653

What Does the Human Olfactory System Do, and How Does It Do It? [2]

Review article Dikeçligil GN, Gottfried JA · · 2024 · cited 33 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Historically, the human sense of smell has been regarded as the odd stepchild of the senses, especially compared to the sensory bravado of seeing, touching, and hearing.
Closing excerpt
We conclude by offering some guideposts for harnessing the next decade of olfactory research in all its shapes and forms.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (146 words)

Historically, the human sense of smell has been regarded as the odd stepchild of the senses, especially compared to the sensory bravado of seeing, touching, and hearing. The idea that the human olfaction has little to contribute to our experience of the world is commonplace, though with the emergence of COVID-19 there has rather been a sea change in this understanding. An ever increasing body of work has convincingly highlighted the keen capabilities of the human nose and the sophistication of the human olfactory system. Here, we provide a concise overview of the neuroscience of human olfaction spanning the last 10-15 years, with focus on the peripheral and central mechanisms that underlie how odor information is processed, packaged, parceled, predicted, and perturbed to serve odor-guided behaviors. We conclude by offering some guideposts for harnessing the next decade of olfactory research in all its shapes and forms.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 37788573 · DOI · PMC12931680

High-speed odor sensing using miniaturized electronic nose [3]

Research article Dennler N, Drix D, Warner TPA, Rastogi S, Casa CD, Ackels T, et al. · · 2024 · cited 31 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Animals have evolved to rapidly detect and recognize brief and intermittent encounters with odor packages, exhibiting recognition capabilities within milliseconds.
Closing excerpt
This will allow for addressing challenges in environmental and industrial monitoring, security, neuroscience, and beyond.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (142 words)

Animals have evolved to rapidly detect and recognize brief and intermittent encounters with odor packages, exhibiting recognition capabilities within milliseconds. Artificial olfaction has faced challenges in achieving comparable results-existing solutions are either slow; or bulky, expensive, and power-intensive-limiting applicability in real-world scenarios for mobile robotics. Here, we introduce a miniaturized high-speed electronic nose, characterized by high-bandwidth sensor readouts, tightly controlled sensing parameters, and powerful algorithms. The system is evaluated on a high-fidelity odor delivery benchmark. We showcase successful classification of tens-of-millisecond odor pulses and demonstrate temporal pattern encoding of stimuli switching with up to 60 hertz. Those timescales are unprecedented in miniaturized low-power settings and demonstrably exceed the performance observed in mice. It is now possible to match the temporal resolution of animal olfaction in robotic systems. This will allow for addressing challenges in environmental and industrial monitoring, security, neuroscience, and beyond.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39504378 · DOI · PMC11540037

Control of innate olfactory valence by segregated cortical amygdala circuits [4]

Research article Howe JR, Chan CL, Lee D, Blanquart M, Lee JH, Decoster L, et al. · · 2026 · cited 8 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Animals exhibit innate behaviors that are stereotyped responses to specific evolutionarily relevant stimuli in the absence of prior learning or experience.
Closing excerpt
Together, these data support a model whereby distinct, topographically distributed plCoA populations direct innate olfactory responses by signaling to divergent valence-specific targets, linking upstream olfactory identity to downstream valence behaviors, through a population code.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (199 words)

Animals exhibit innate behaviors that are stereotyped responses to specific evolutionarily relevant stimuli in the absence of prior learning or experience. The posterolateral cortical amygdala (plCoA) mediates innate attraction and aversion to odor. Here, we sought to define the circuit features of plCoA that give rise to innate attraction and aversion to odor in mice. First, we examined odor-evoked responses in these areas and found sparse encoding of odor identity, but not valence. We next considered a topographic organization and found that optogenetic stimulation of the anterior and posterior domains of plCoA elicits avoidance and attraction, respectively, suggesting a functional axis for valence. Using single-cell and spatial RNA sequencing, we identified the molecular cell types in plCoA, revealing an anteroposterior gradient in glutamatergic neurons that are sufficient and partially necessary for behavior. Finally, we identified topographically organized projections, whereby anterior neurons preferentially project to medial amygdala, and posterior neurons preferentially project to nucleus accumbens, which are respectively sufficient and necessary for innate attraction and aversion. Together, these data support a model whereby distinct, topographically distributed plCoA populations direct innate olfactory responses by signaling to divergent valence-specific targets, linking upstream olfactory identity to downstream valence behaviors, through a population code.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41870253 · DOI · PMC13008359

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Evolution of insect olfaction [5]
    Hansson BS, Stensmyr MC · Neuron · 2011 · cited 574 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Cortical processing of odor objects [6]
    Wilson DA, Sullivan RM · Neuron · 2011 · cited 354 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Poor human olfaction is a 19th-century myth [7]
    McGann JP · Science · 2017 · cited 246 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The Drosophila Mushroom Body: From Architecture to Algorithm in a Learning Circuit [8]
    Modi MN, Shuai Y, Turner GC · Annu Rev Neurosci · 2020 · cited 188 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Advances in electronic-nose technologies developed for biomedical applications [9]
    Wilson AD, Baietto M · Sensors (Basel) · 2011 · cited 188 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Aversion and attraction through olfaction [10]
    Li Q, Liberles SD · Curr Biol · 2015 · cited 154 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Bratman GN, Bembibre C, Daily GC, Doty RL, Hummel T, Jacobs LF, et al.. Nature and human well-being: The olfactory pathway. . 2024. PMID 38748806 · DOI · PMC11809653
  2. Dikeçligil GN, Gottfried JA. What Does the Human Olfactory System Do, and How Does It Do It?. . 2024. PMID 37788573 · DOI · PMC12931680
  3. Dennler N, Drix D, Warner TPA, Rastogi S, Casa CD, Ackels T, et al.. High-speed odor sensing using miniaturized electronic nose. . 2024. PMID 39504378 · DOI · PMC11540037
  4. Howe JR, Chan CL, Lee D, Blanquart M, Lee JH, Decoster L, et al.. Control of innate olfactory valence by segregated cortical amygdala circuits. . 2026. PMID 41870253 · DOI · PMC13008359
  5. Hansson BS, Stensmyr MC. Evolution of insect olfaction. Neuron. 2011. PMID 22153368 · DOI
  6. Wilson DA, Sullivan RM. Cortical processing of odor objects. Neuron. 2011. PMID 22099455 · DOI · PMC3223720
  7. McGann JP. Poor human olfaction is a 19th-century myth. Science. 2017. PMID 28495701 · DOI · PMC5512720
  8. Modi MN, Shuai Y, Turner GC. The Drosophila Mushroom Body: From Architecture to Algorithm in a Learning Circuit. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2020. PMID 32283995 · DOI
  9. Wilson AD, Baietto M. Advances in electronic-nose technologies developed for biomedical applications. Sensors (Basel). 2011. PMID 22346620 · DOI · PMC3274093
  10. Li Q, Liberles SD. Aversion and attraction through olfaction. Curr Biol. 2015. PMID 25649823 · DOI · PMC4317791

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-29.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • TouchNeuroscience
  • TasteNeuroscience
  • PainNeuroscience
  • Acute PainNeuroscience
  • Back PainNeuroscience
  • Cancer PainNeuroscience

All 110 articles in Neuroscience →

At a glance

20,075
PubMed records on this heading
22%
published since 2020
2,232
review articles
360
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-29; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • TouchNeuroscience
  • TasteNeuroscience
  • PainNeuroscience
  • Acute PainNeuroscience
  • Back PainNeuroscience

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support