SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Association between Dysgeusia and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study With Propensity Score-Matched Analyses.

Oral Health Prev Dent · 2026-02-24

DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.c_2528PMID: 41733602

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

PurposeDysgeusia impairs quality of life and nutrition, and may be linked to cardiovascular disease risk, but its direct association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains understudied. This study aimed to investigate the independent association between dysgeusia and ASCVD.Methods and materialsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis using a nationally representative population sample. The association between dysgeusia and ASCVD was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, body mass index, smoking, alcohol consumption, diet quality, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, periodontitis, diabetes mellitus, Parkinson's disease, and depression. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to further control for confounding and to validate the findings.ResultsIn the unadjusted model, dysgeusia was significantly associated with higher odds of ASCVD (odds ratio [OR] = 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.39-2.55; P 0.01). After full adjustment, the association remained significant (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01-2.13; P = 0.05). PSM analysis further confirmed this relationship, showing that individuals with dysgeusia had 87% greater odds of ASCVD compared to matched controls (OR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.08-3.23; P = 0.03).ConclusionDysgeusia is independently associated with increased odds of ASCVD, even after comprehensive adjustment and PSM. Dysgeusia may serve as a novel and clinically relevant potential indicator for ASCVD, warranting further investigation in prospective studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.