Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25179792›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of epidemiology2014

Caffeine intake during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.

Darren C Greenwood, Natalie J Thatcher, Jin Ye, Lucy Garrard, Georgina Keogh, Laura G King, Janet E Cade

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of epidemiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Maternal Caffeine Consumption and Pregnancy Outcomes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Darren C GreenwoodDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK, d.c.greenwood@leeds.ac.uk.
Natalie J Thatcher
Jin Ye
Lucy Garrard
Georgina Keogh
Laura G King
Janet E Cade
University of Leeds · GBFood Standards Agency · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Caffeine is commonly consumed during pregnancy, crosses the placenta, with fetal serum concentrations similar to the mother's, but studies of birth outcome show conflicting findings. We systematically searched Medline and Embase for relevant publications. We conducted meta-analysis of dose-response curves for associations between caffeine intake and spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, preterm delivery, low birth weight and small for gestational age (SGA) infants. Meta-analyses included 60 unique publications from 53 cohort and case-control studies. An increment of 100 g caffeine was associated with a 14 % (95 % CI 10-19 %) increase in risk of spontaneous abortion, 19 % (5-35 %) stillbirth, 2 % (-2 to 6 %) preterm delivery, 7 % (1-12 %) low birth weight, and 10 % (95 % CI 6-14 %) SGA. There was substantial heterogeneity in all models, partly explained by adjustment for smoking and previous obstetric history, but not by prospective assessment of caffeine intake. There was evidence of small-study effects such as publication bias. Greater caffeine intake is associated with an increase in spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, low birth weight, and SGA, but not preterm delivery. There is no identifiable threshold below which the associations are not apparent, but the size of the associations are generally modest within the range of usual intake and are potentially explained by bias in study design or publication. There is therefore insufficient evidence to support further reductions in the maximum recommended intake of caffeine, but maintenance of current recommendations is a wise precaution.

Indexed as

Birth WeightPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthAbortion, SpontaneousCaffeineFemaleHumansInfant, Small for Gestational AgePregnancyRiskStillbirthCaffeine

Identifiers

PMID25179792
OpenAlexW2010755639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.