Observational studyMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Caffeine Health Claims on Sports Supplement Labeling. Analytical Assessment According to EFSA Scientific Opinion and International Evidence and Criteria.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- From labels to influencers: evaluating the alignment of nitrate and beetroot juice claims on sports supplement marketing with scientific consensus.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- The intervention effect of caffeine oral tablets on mental fatigue induced by nap deprivation: based on assessments of heart rate variability, cognitive performance and subjective fatigue-a pilot study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Ergogenic and Physiological Effects of Sports Supplements: Implications for Advertising and Consumer Information.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Health Claims for Protein Food Supplements for Athletes-The Analysis Is in Accordance with the EFSA's Scientific Opinion.Nutrients · 2025Observational
- Health Claims for Sports Drinks-Analytical Assessmentaccording to European Food Safety Authority's Scientific Opinion.Nutrients · 2024Observational
- The Prevalence and Compliance of Health Claims Used in the Labelling and Information for Prepacked Foods within Great Britain.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Analysis of the Consumption of Sports Supplements in Open Water Swimmers According to the Competitive Level.Nutrients · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.