ArticleHeliyon2025
The complexity of caffeine's effects on regular coffee consumers.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Caffeinated Brain Part 1: The Effects of Caffeine on Event-Related Potentials (ERPs)-A Systematic and Mechanistic Review.Nutrients · 2026Pooled it
- Sex differences in resting state EEG spectral power are more prominent than menstrual cycle effects in healthy young adults.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Decentralized EEG-based detection of major depressive disorder via transformer architectures and split learning.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Why does coffee wake us up? Is it because it contains caffeine, or because we are used to it waking us up after drinking it? To answer this question, we recruited twenty habitual coffee drinkers who received either caffeinated or decaffeinated coffee (placebo) in a double-blind, randomized fashion. The two substances were identical except for the presence of caffeine. We measured cognitive performance, cardiovascular responses, and whole-head EEG during rest and during an auditory-oddball task. The same measurements were done before and after ingestion. We expected to find significant differences between caffeine and placebo groups across the outcome measures. However, except for the resting-state alpha power, changes due to ingestion in physiological responses and in cognitive functioning were not significantly different between the two groups. Actually, only one of the three cognitive measures was found to be significantly altered by the ingestion. These findings suggest that regular coffee consumers respond to coffee-like beverages independently of the presence of caffeine.
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.