ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mapping smart technologies and nutritional strategies for monitoring cognitive resilience in military personnel under extreme operational conditions: a scoping review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Understanding stressors in combination: a continued challenge for human performance.Experimental physiology · 2026Review
- Integrating Cognitive and Mood Assessments into the Heat Tolerance Test for Male Soldiers After Exertional Heat Injury: A Prospective Observational Study.Sports medicine - open · 2025Article
- The impact of a 20-h rotating watch schedule on cognitive and mood states in submarine operations.Journal of sleep research · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This observational study investigated the effects of sleep deprivation and ad libitum caffeine consumption on cognitive performance, risk behavior, and mood among 28 Israeli Special Forces (SF) soldiers (mean age: 20.57 ± 0.92 years) during a 96-hour combat exercise. Methods: Actigraphy was used to monitor sleep and activity; cognitive function, risk-taking propensity, mood states, and self-reported sleepiness were assessed using the Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT), Evaluation of Risks Scale (EVAR), Profile of Mood States (POMS), Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS); and caffeine consumption by questionnaire at 0, 50, and 96 hours. For analyses, participants were divided into Low (<400 mg) and High (≥400 mg) caffeine consumption groups. Results: The soldiers hiked 108.5 ± 0.52 km and slept for 12.7 ± 0.5 h, with a notable transition from multiple short sleep epochs in the initial 50 hours to a consolidated 5-hour sleep period subsequently. In the High caffeine group, PVT reaction time was faster ( Discussion: These results suggest that while caffeine enhances cognitive function, its ad libitum consumption did not consistently improve these measures in this cohort of SF soldiers. The study highlights the complex relationship between sleep deprivation and caffeine intake and their combined effects on soldiers' cognitive and behavioral functions, indicating a need for evidence-based caffeine use guidelines for using caffeine in military settings.
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.