Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33917477›Full record

Observational studyMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Caffeine Health Claims on Sports Supplement Labeling. Analytical Assessment According to EFSA Scientific Opinion and International Evidence and Criteria.

Pedro Estevan Navarro, Isabel Sospedra, Alejandro Perales, Cristina González-Díaz, Rubén Jiménez-Alfageme, Sonia Medina, Angel Gil-Izquierdo, José Miguel Martínez-Sanz

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Pedro Estevan NavarroFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0452-0084
Isabel SospedraNursing Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8513-8986
Alejandro PeralesCommunication Sciences and Sociology, Faculty of Communication Sciences, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28933 Madrid, Spain.
Cristina González-DíazPsychology and Social Communication Department, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6981-0499
Rubén Jiménez-AlfagemeFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1383-0233
Sonia MedinaQuality, Safety, and Bioactivity of Plant Foods Group, Department of Food Science and Technology, CEBAS-CSIC, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.
Angel Gil-IzquierdoQuality, Safety, and Bioactivity of Plant Foods Group, Department of Food Science and Technology, CEBAS-CSIC, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7646-0386
José Miguel Martínez-SanzNursing Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9054-3858

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Caffeine is a food supplement widely consumed by athletes, but it has not been established. So far, the veracity of their labeling in terms of the dosage and cause/effect relationship aimed at the consumer. The aim is to analyze the health claims and the dosage presented on the labeling of caffeine supplements and to evaluate if they follow the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and international criteria. A descriptive cross-sectional study of a sample of caffeine supplements was carried out. The search was done through the Amazon and Google Shopping web portals. In order to assess the adequacy of the health claims, the guidelines of reference established by European Food Safety Authority were compared to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, International Olympic Committee, and Australian Institute of Sport guidelines; in addition, recent systematic reviews were addressed. A review of labels of 42 caffeine supplements showed that, in less than 3% of the products were the health claims supported by the recommendations and by the labeled quantity of caffeine. The claims that fully complied the recommendations were, "improves or increases endurance performance", "improves strength performance", or "improves short-term performance". In most cases, the recommended dosage was 200 mg/day for these products, which is the minimum for the caffeine effects to be declared. The rest of the health claims were not adequate or need to be modified. Most of the health claims identified indicated an unproven cause and effect, which constitutes consumer fraud, and so must be modified or eliminated.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsFood LabelingFood SafetyHealthInternationalityScienceSportsCaffeineEuropeHumansCaffeinecaffeinefraudhealth claimsnutritionperformancesport

Identifiers

PMID33917477
PMCPMC8038803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.