Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26329421›Full record

SynthesisPublic health nutrition2016

Maternal caffeine intake during pregnancy and risk of pregnancy loss: a categorical and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Ling-Wei Chen, Yi Wu, Nithya Neelakantan, Mary Foong-Fong Chong, An Pan, Rob M van Dam

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Public health nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Australasian recurrent pregnancy loss clinical management guideline 2024, part II.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2024
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Maternal Caffeine Consumption and Pregnancy Outcomes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Ling-Wei Chen1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,Tahir Foundation Building,12 Science Drive 2,Level 10,#10-01,Singapore 117549.
Yi Wu1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,Tahir Foundation Building,12 Science Drive 2,Level 10,#10-01,Singapore 117549.
Nithya Neelakantan1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,Tahir Foundation Building,12 Science Drive 2,Level 10,#10-01,Singapore 117549.
Mary Foong-Fong Chong2Department of Paediatrics,Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,CRC,MD11,10 Medical Drive,Level 1,#01-08,Singapore 117597.
An Pan1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,Tahir Foundation Building,12 Science Drive 2,Level 10,#10-01,Singapore 117549.
Rob M van Dam1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health,National University of Singapore and National University Health System,Tahir Foundation Building,12 Science Drive 2,Level 10,#10-01,Singapore 117549.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the association between maternal caffeine intake and risk of pregnancy loss using a systematic review and meta-analysis.

designCategorical and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.

settingRelevant articles were identified by searching MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases through 30 January 2015. Two authors independently extracted information from eligible studies. Random-effects models were used to derive the summary relative risks (RR) and corresponding 95% CI for specific categories of caffeine consumption and for a continuous association using generalized least-squares trend estimation. SUBJECTS: A total of 130 456 participants and 3429 cases in fourteen included studies.

resultsCompared with the reference category with no or very low caffeine intake, the RR (95% CI) of pregnancy loss was 1·02 (0·85, 1·24; I(2)=28·3%) for low intake (50-149 mg/d), 1·16 (0·94, 1·41; I 2=49·6%) for moderate intake (150-349 mg/d), 1·40 (1·16, 1·68; I(2)=18·6%) for high intake (350-699 mg/d) and 1·72 (1·40, 2·13; I(2)=0·0%) for very high intake (≥ 700 mg/d). In the dose-response analysis, each 100 mg/d increment in maternal caffeine intake (~1 cup of coffee) was associated with 7% (95% CI 3%, 12%) higher risk of pregnancy loss. Our results may have been affected by publication bias, but the association remained significant for the subset of larger studies. Furthermore, adjustment for smoking and pregnancy symptoms may have been incomplete, potentially resulting in residual confounding.

conclusionsAlbeit inconclusive, higher maternal caffeine intake was associated with a higher risk of pregnancy loss and adherence to guidelines to avoid high caffeine intake during pregnancy appears prudent.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousCaffeineCoffeeDatabases, FactualDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHumansPregnancyRisk FactorsCaffeineCoffeeCaffeineCoffeeMiscarriagePregnancyPregnancy lossSpontaneous abortionStillbirth

Identifiers

PMID26329421
PMCPMC10271029

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.