Cited by 380Coffee research and impactsSleep and Work-Related FatigueSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Withdrawal Syndrome after the Double-Blind Cessation of Caffeine Consumption

Open access
Silverman, Kenneth, Evans, Suzette M., Strain, Eric C., Griffiths, Roland R.·1992·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: People who stop consuming caffeine may have symptoms, but the incidence and severity of caffeine withdrawal are not known. This study was performed to determine the effects in the general population of ending one's dietary intake of caffeine. METHODS: We studied 62 normal adults whose intake of caffeine was low to moderate (mean amount, 235 mg--the equivalent of 2.5 cups of coffee--per day). They completed questionnaires about symptoms and tests of their mood and performance when consuming their normal diets (base-line period) and at the end of each of two two-day periods during which they consumed caffeine-free diets and under double-blind conditions received capsules containing placebo (placebo period) or caffeine (caffeine period) in amounts equal to their daily caffeine consumption. RESULTS: More subjects had abnormally high Beck Depression Inventory scores (11 percent), high scores on the trait scale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (8 percent), low vigor scores (11 percent) and high fatigue scores (8 percent) on the Profile of Mood States, and moderate or severe headache (52 percent) during the placebo period than during either the base-line period (2, 0, 0, 0, and 2 percent, respectively; P less than 0.05) or the caffeine period (3, 2, 2, 0, and 6 percent; P less than 0.05). More subjects reported unauthorized use of medications during the placebo period (13 percent) than during the caffeine period (2 percent, P = 0.017). Performance of a tapping task was slower during the placebo period than during the base-line and caffeine periods (P less than 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Persons who consume low or moderate amounts of caffeine may have a withdrawal syndrome after their daily consumption of caffeine ceases.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199210153271601

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 19 · Cited by 380

Authors
Silverman, K., Evans, S. M., Strain, E. C., & Griffiths, R. R.
Affiliations
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1992-10-15
Volume
327
Issue
16
Pages
1109-1114
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1968460688
Cited by
380
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
13.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA03890, R01DA003890)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
caffeine withdrawal, caffeine, depression, anxiety, mood, fatigue, headache, cognitive performance, medication use
MeSH terms
Adult, Caffeine, Depression, Diet, Double-Blind Method, Female, Headache, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Psychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome

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