Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29417616›Full record

SynthesisHuman psychopharmacology2018

Alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED): A critical review and meta-analysis.

Joris C Verster, Sarah Benson, Sean J Johnson, Chris Alford, Samuel Benrejeb Godefroy, Andrew Scholey

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human psychopharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Effects of Mixing Energy Drinks With Alcohol on Driving-Related Skills.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Joris C VersterDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6455-2096
Sarah BensonCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
Sean J JohnsonPsychological Sciences Research Group, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.
Chris AlfordPsychological Sciences Research Group, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.
Samuel Benrejeb GodefroyDepartment of Food Sciences, Food Risk Analysis and Regulatory Excellence Platform (FRAREP), Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods (INAF), Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Andrew ScholeyCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
Swinburne University of Technology · AUUniversity of the West of England · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBUniversity of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically review the (1) prevalence of alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED) consumption, (2) motives for AMED consumption, (3) correlates of AMED consumption, and (4) whether AMED consumption has an impact on (a) alcohol consumption, (b) subjective intoxication, and (c) risk-taking behavior. Overall a minority of the population consumes AMED, typically infrequently. Motives for AMED consumption are predominantly hedonistic and social. Meta-analyses revealed that AMED consumers drink significantly more alcohol than alcohol-only (AO) consumers. Within-subject comparisons restricted to AMED consumers revealed that alcohol consumption does not significantly differ between typical AMED and AO occasions. On past month heaviest drinking occasions, AMED users consume significantly less alcohol on AMED occasions when compared to AO occasions. AMED consumers experience significantly fewer negative consequences and risk-taking behavior on AMED occasions compared with AO occasions. Meta-analyses of subjective intoxication studies suggest that AMED consumption does not differentially affect subjective intoxication when compared to AO consumption. In conclusion, when compared to AO consumption, mixing alcohol with energy drink does not affect subjective intoxication and seems unlikely to increase total alcohol consumption, associated risk-taking behavior, nor other negative alcohol-related consequences. Further research may be necessary to fully reveal the effects of AMED.

Indexed as

Energy DrinksAlcohol DrinkingAlcoholic BeveragesDrinking BehaviorHumansalcoholalcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED)negative consequencesrisk takingsubjective intoxication

Identifiers

PMID29417616
PMCPMC5901036
OpenAlexW2788553801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.