Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24522465›Full record

ReviewThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2014

Caffeine in tea Camellia sinensis--content, absorption, benefits and risks of consumption.

A Gramza-Michałowska

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Oral Health and Nutraceutical Agents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Innovative Application of Chicken Eggshell Calcium to Improve the Functional Value of Gingerbread.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

A Gramza-MichałowskaA. Gramza-Michałowska, Faculty of Food Science and Nutrition, Poznań University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 31, 60-624 Poznań, Poland, Tel. +48(61)8487331, Fax +48(61)8487430, E-mail: angramza@up.poznan.pl.
University of Life Sciences in Lublin · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Therapeutic properties of tea Camellia sinensis are of particular interest since it has been consumed for ages and was always regarded as safe beverage. Tea is most popular beverage in the world because of its attractive aroma, exceptional taste, health promoting and pharmaceutical potential. Current results showed that antioxidative, antibacterial and other health effects are attributed to its caffeine content and caffeine - polyphenols interactions. An overview is given on caffeine content in different tea leaves beverage. Special attention is drawn to caffeine physiological effect on human organism. Controversies concerning the possible caffeine influence on human physical and psychological health are briefly summarized and presented.

Indexed as

BeveragesCaffeineCamellia sinensisHumansPlant ExtractsPlant LeavesPolyphenolsRisk AssessmentTeaCaffeinePlant ExtractsPolyphenolsTea

Identifiers

PMID24522465
PMCPMC12878946
OpenAlexW2099751476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.