Cited by 15Obstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchCoffee research and impactsSleep and related disorders

Caffeine intake is independently associated with neuropsychological performance in patients with obstructive sleep apnea

Open access
Norman, Daniel, Bardwell, Wayne A., Loredo, Jose S., Ancoli-Israel, Sonia, Heaton, Robert K., Dimsdale, Joel E.·2008·Sleep and Breathing

Abstract

In healthy individuals, caffeine intake may improve performance on cognitive tests. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a disorder that has been associated with impaired cognitive function. In this study, we investigated whether increased caffeine intake in untreated patients with OSA is linked to better cognitive performance. Forty-five untreated OSA patients underwent baseline polysomnography after completing a survey of 24-h caffeine intake. Participants completed a battery of neuropsychological tests, then demographically corrected T scores and a global deficit score (GDS) were calculated on these tests. Partial correlation analysis was performed to compare daily caffeine intake with GDS, after controlling for body mass index (BMI) and sleep apnea severity. Analysis of covariance was done to examine differences in daily caffeine intake between cognitively impaired (GDS ≥ 0.5) and non-impaired (GDS < 0.5) individuals. Seven out of the 45 subjects met the criteria (GDS ≥ 0.5) for cognitive impairment. There was a significant inverse association between caffeine intake and the GDS, both when controlling for BMI (r = −0.331, p = 0.04) and when controlling for BMI and apnea severity (r = −0.500, p = 0.002); those with less impairment consumed more caffeine. Analysis of covariance demonstrated that cognitively impaired individuals consumed one-sixth as much caffeine as non-impaired individuals (p < 0.05). In patients with moderately severe OSA, higher average daily caffeine intake was associated with less cognitive impairment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11325-007-0153-7

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Caffeine may have a potential therapeutic effect and may serve as evidence for self-treatment of OSA.

    “Studies on patients with untreated OSA have demonstrated that increased caffeine intake is associated with less cognitive impairment523 thereby indicating a potential therapeutic effect of caffeine and evidence for self-treatment of OSA.”

    From International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (2023) · cites this paper as [523]

    The Results report that higher caffeine intake was associated with less cognitive impairment in untreated OSA patients, and the Discussion proposes further research into caffeine’s potential to improve neuropsychological function. The Introduction speculates that greater caffeine use among OSA patients may be an attempt to stay alert, but the study does not establish that patients were self-treating OSA or that caffeine had a therapeutic effect. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Increased caffeine intake is associated with less cognitive impairment in patients with untreated OSA.

    “Studies on patients with untreated OSA have demonstrated that increased caffeine intake is associated with less cognitive impairment523 thereby indicating a potential therapeutic effect of caffeine and evidence for self-treatment of OSA.”

    From International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (2023) · cites this paper as [523]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Norman, D., Bardwell, W. A., Loredo, J. S., Ancoli-Israel, S., Heaton, R. K., & Dimsdale, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Saint John's Health Center (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Norman, Daniel
Venue
Sleep and Breathing
Published
2007-11-09
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
199-205
ISSN
  • 1520-9512 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1709
OpenAlex
W2046890952
Cited by
15
References
46
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sleep And Breathing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG008415, AG 08415)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL44915, R01HL036005, R01HL044915)
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR0827, M01RR000827)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
Keywords
caffeine consumption, obstructive sleep apnea, cognitive impairment, neuropsychological performance, global deficit score, body mass index, apnea severity, cognitive function
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Caffeine, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Wechsler Scales, Body Mass Index, Polysomnography, Sleep Apnea, Obstructive

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review