Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26501499›Full record

Trial reportJournal of consulting and clinical psychology2016

A brief manualized treatment for problematic caffeine use: A randomized control trial.

Daniel P Evatt, Laura M Juliano, Roland R Griffiths

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Caffeine in Aging Brains: Cognitive Enhancement, Neurodegeneration, and Emerging Concerns About Addiction.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  4. Caffeine, Daytime Sleepiness, and Conduct Problems Among Early Adolescents: A Longitudinal Analysis.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Translation and validation of the caffeine use disorder questionnaire in Arabic.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Daniel P EvattDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Laura M JulianoDepartment of Psychology, American University.
Roland R GriffithsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Funding

LICIT &ILLICIT ABUSED STIMULANT DRUGSR01DA003890 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI LEE, DUSTIN CLARK · 1985 to 2021
$8.0M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA003890NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA 03890
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe goal of the present investigation was to develop and test a brief therapist-guided manualized treatment for problematic caffeine use, including cognitive-behavioral strategies and 5 weeks of progressively decreased consumption.

methodIndividuals seeking treatment for problematic caffeine use (mean daily caffeine consumption of 666 mg at baseline) were randomized using a waitlist-control design to receive immediate treatment (N = 33) or delayed treatment (∼6 weeks later; N = 34). A 1-hr treatment session designed to help individuals quit or reduce caffeine consumption was provided by a trained counselor along with a take-home booklet. After the treatment session, participants completed daily diaries of caffeine consumption for 5 weeks. They returned for follow-up assessments at 6, 12, and 26 weeks and had a telephone interview at 52-weeks posttreatment.

resultsTreatment resulted in a significant reduction in self-reported caffeine use and salivary caffeine levels. No significant posttreatment increases in caffeine use were observed for up to 1 year follow-up. Comparisons to the waitlist-control condition revealed that reductions in caffeine consumption were due to treatment and not the passing of time, with a treatment effect size of R² = .35 for the model.

conclusionA brief 1-session manualized intervention with follow-up was efficacious at reducing caffeine consumption. Future researchers should replicate and extend these findings, as well as consider factors affecting dissemination of treatment for problematic caffeine use to those in need.

Indexed as

AdultBeveragesCaffeineCentral Nervous System StimulantsCognitive Behavioral TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMalePamphletsPsychotherapy, BriefSubstance-Related DisordersTreatment OutcomeCaffeineCentral Nervous System Stimulants

Identifiers

PMID26501499
PMCPMC4737992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.