The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A meta-analysis of risk of pregnancy loss and caffeine and coffee consumption during pregnancy
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous reports of the relationship between pregnancy loss and caffeine/coffee consumption have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between pregnancy loss and caffeine and coffee consumption. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed was searched for reports published before September 2014, with the keywords "caffeine," "coffee," "beverage," "miscarriage," "spontaneous abortion," and "fetal loss." SELECTION CRITERIA: Case-control and cohort studies were included when they had been reported in English, the exposure of interest was caffeine/coffee consumption during pregnancy, the outcome of interest was spontaneous abortion or fetal death, and multivariate-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) or risk ratios were provided or could be calculated. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted and combined ORs calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 26 studies were included (20 of caffeine and eight of coffee). After adjustment for heterogeneity, caffeine consumption was associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss (OR 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.40), as was coffee consumption (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21). A dose-response analysis suggested that risk of pregnancy loss rose by 19% for every increase in caffeine intake of 150 mg/day and by 8% for every increase in coffee intake of two cups per day. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption of caffeine and coffee during pregnancy seems to increase the risk of pregnancy loss.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Similar findings were reported by Li et al. (127), who found in a separate meta-analysis of 26 studies that the risk of pregnancy loss increased by 19% for every additional 150 mg of caffeine consumed per day and by 8% for every additional 2 cups of coffee (about 200 mg) per day (127).”
From The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review (2017) · cites this paper as [127]
Citations
Cites
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689 · cited 1×
“The random effects model was used as the pooling method if an obvious between-study heterogeneity (I(2) N 50%) was found [10]; otherwise, the fixed effects model was used [11].”
MethodMethods for Trend Estimation from Summarized Dose-Response Data, with Applications to Meta-Analysis
Greenland, S., & Longnecker, M. P. (1992) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116237 · Cited by 2,353
Lohmueller, K. E., Pearce, C. L., Pike, M., Lander, E. S., & Hirschhorn, J. N. (2003) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1071 · Cited by 1,900
Generalized Least Squares for Trend Estimation of Summarized Dose–response Data
Orsini, N., Bellocco, R., & Greenland, S. (2006) · The Stata Journal Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0600600103 · Cited by 1,248
Cumulative Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Trials for Myocardial Infarction
Lau, J., Antman, E. M., Jimenez-Silva, J., Kupelnick, B., Mosteller, F., & Chalmers, T. C. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199207233270406 · Cited by 1,140
Risk factors for first trimester miscarriage—results from a UK-population-based case-control study
Maconochie, N., Doyle, P., Prior, S., & Simmons, R. (2007) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01193.x · Cited by 387
Weng, X., Odouli, R., & Li, D.-K. (2008) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.10.803 · Cited by 279
Caffeine metabolism in the newborn
Aldridge, A., Aranda, J. V., & Neims, A. H. (1979) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/cpt1979254447 · Cited by 268
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Zhao N.Q., 1999, Assessment for Relative Risk RR = 1, RR > 1 and RR < 1 by Using the Results of Odds Ratio Test, J Shanghai Med Univ, 26, 425
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Coffee consumption and health: umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple health outcomes
Poole, R., Kennedy, O. J., Roderick, P., Fallowfield, J. A., Hayes, P. C., & Parkes, J. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j5024 · Cited by 835
The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review
Temple, J. L., Bernard, C., Lipshultz, S. E., Czachor, J. D., Westphal, J. A., & Mestre, M. A. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00080 · Cited by 557
Coffee, Caffeine, and Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review
Grosso, G., Godos, J., Galvano, F., & Giovannucci, E. L. (2017) · Annual Review of Nutrition · doi:10.1146/annurev-nutr-071816-064941 · Cited by 531
Macronutrient and Micronutrient Intake during Pregnancy: An Overview of Recent Evidence
Mousa, A., Naqash, A., & Lim, S. S. (2019) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu11020443 · Cited by 534
Koletzko, B. V., Cremer, M., Flothkötter, M., Gräf, C., Hauner, H., Hellmers, C., Kersting, M., Krawinkel, M. B., Przyrembel, H., Röbl-Mathieu, M., et al. (2018) · Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · doi:10.1055/a-0713-1058 · Cited by 151
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, J., Zhao, H., Song, J., Zhang, J., Tang, Y., & Xin, C.
- Affiliations
- Anhui Medical University (CN)
- Jiangsu Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CN)
- Kunming Medical University (CN)
- Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Xin, Chang‐Mao
- Venue
- International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-05-14
- Volume
- 130
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 116-122
- ISSN
- 0020-6695 (ISSN-L)
- 0020-7292
- 1879-3479
- OpenAlex
- W1632849677
- Cited by
- 102
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5
- FWCI
- 1.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
- Keywords
- caffeine consumption, coffee consumption, miscarriage, fetal death, dose-response relationship, maternal diet during pregnancy
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Spontaneous, Caffeine, Coffee, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Risk
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
