Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Caffeine, cognitive failures and health in a non-working community sample.



Key Questions Addressed
1 For [population], is caffeine intake above [exposure dose], compared to intakes [exposure dose] or less, associated with adverse effects on behavior*?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Caffeine, cognitive failures and health in a non-working community sample.
Author AP Smith,
Country
Year 2009
Numbers

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Behavior - Design Details - INCLUDED Studies
Arms
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Refid 19016251
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What outcome is being evaluated in this paper? Behavior
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the objective of the study (as reported by the authors)? Secondary analyses of a large epidemiological database (N=3223 non-working participants, 57% female, with a mean age of 49.6 years, range 17–92 years) were conducted to examine associations between caffeine consumption (mean caffeine consumption was 140 mg/day, range 0–1800 mg) and cognitive failures (errors of memory, attention and action) in a non-working sample. Associations between caffeine consumption and physical and mental health problems were also examined.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide a general description of the methods as reported by the authors. Information should be extracted based on relevance to the SR (i.e., caffeine related methods) This involved a secondary analysis of a database formed by combining the Bristol Stress and Health at Work study and the Cardiff Health and Safety at Work study. Details of the database are given in Smith et al. (2003) and Smith (2005b). This database contained information on level of caffeine consumption, cognitive failures and health outcomes. In addition, it contained information about possible confounders that need to be controlled in such analyses (e.g. demographics and health-related behaviours—see Wadsworth et al., 2003). Caffeine consumption The participants provided information on their normal daily consumption of caffeinated drinks and their daily consumption was calculated using the values given by Barone and Roberts (1996). Caffeine from other sources (e.g. chocolate or medication) was not recorded. Health outcomes This section of the questionnaire consisted of four parts. The third involved mental health outcomes (anxiety and depression, measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Zigmond and Snaith, 1983). Finally, use of health services was measured by visits to the GP, hospital outpatient attendance and whether or not the person had been a hospital in-patient. SAMPLE The sample consisted of 3223 non-working participants (57% female) with a mean age of 49.6 years (SD 21.9; range 17–92 years). Mean caffeine consumption was 140 mg/day (SD 171; range 0–1800 mg). STATISTICAL ANALYSES Initial analyses involved univariate cross-tabulations and logistic regressions to examine associations between caffeine consumption (split into quartiles) and the outcomes. Potential confounders were then entered into a series of multi-variate logistic regressions and the adjusted odds ratios presented. In the logistic regressions non-consumption of caffeine was set as the reference category. The significance of individual comparisons can be seen from the adjusted odds ratios and confidence levels.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
How many outcome-specific endpoints are evaluated? 1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the (or one of the) endpoint(s) evaluated? (Each endpoint listed separately) clinical depression
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List additional health endpoints (separately).
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List additional health endpoints (separately)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Clinical Clinical
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Physiological
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Other
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the study design? Cross-sectional
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Randomized or Non-Randomized?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the diagnostics or methods used to measure the outcome? Subjective
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Optional: Name of Method or short description Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Caffeine (general) Caffeine (general)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Coffee
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Chocolate
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Energy drinks
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Gum
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Medicine/Supplement
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Soda
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Tea
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Measured
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self-report Self-report
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Children
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Adolescents
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Adults Adults
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Pregnant Women
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What was the reference, comparison, or control group(s)? (e.g. high vs low consumption, number of cups, etc.) 0 mg/day vs 1-140 mg/day, 141-260 mg/day, > 260 mg/day
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the listed confounders or modifying factors as stated by the authors? (e.g. multi-variable components of models.  Copy from methods) demographics and health-related behaviours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide a general description of results (as reported by the authors). Recurrent illness over the last 12 months. None of the health outcomes were significantly associated with caffeine consumption except for clinical depression. Higher caffeine consumption was associated with a reduced risk of depression ( p<0.005; 1–140 mg/day: OR=0.32 CI 0.2, 0.5; 141–260 mg/day: OR=0.18 CI¼0.1, 0.3; >260 mg/day: OR=0.12 CI: 0.1, 0.2).
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Did the authors perform a dose-response analysis (or trend/related analysis)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the authors's observations re: trend analysis?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the author's conclusions? Indeed, the only effect of caffeine on life-time prevalence of disease was found for angina and the only 12-month health effect that remained significant was depression, with higher caffeine consumption being associated with reduced risk of angina and clinical depression. Indeed, the present results suggest that consumption of caffeine is associated with both better cognitive functioning and mental health.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the sources of funding? Professor Smith’s research on caffeine has been supported by the Institute for Scientific Information on Coffee.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What conflicts of interest were reported? N/A
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does the exposure (dose) need to be standardized to the SR? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide calculations/conversions for the exposure based on the decision tree in the guide (for all endpoints/exposure levels of interest).
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List all the endpoint(s) followed by the dose (mg) which will be used in comparison to Nawrot.  Characterize value as LOAEL/NOAEL, etc. if possible.  depression (clinical) - NOAEL = >260 mg/day
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes regarding selection/listing of endpoints and exposures/doses to be compared to Nawrot. caffeine reduced the risk of suffering from clinical depression
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the importance of the study with respect to the adverseness of the outcome? Critcal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
No baseline characteristics have been defined for this extraction form.



Results & Comparisons

No Results found.
Adverse Events
Arm or Total Title Description Comments

Quality Dimensions
No quality dimensions were specified.

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.