Cited by 60Coffee research and impactsStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyNutritional Studies and Diet

Misclassification of exposure: coffee as a surrogate for caffeine intake

Brown, J.·2001·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

This study was conducted to assess the effect of exposure misclassification when coffee is used as a surrogate measure of caffeine exposure. Subjects were randomly selected from the telephone directories of four regional municipalities in southern Ontario, CANADA: Data on daily caffeine intake from foods, beverages, and medications were collected from June to November 1995 through self-administered, mailed questionnaires from 481 men and women aged 30-75 years. Although coffee was the main source of caffeine, cross-tabulations of exposure to coffee by total caffeine intake showed that assessment of coffee alone severely underestimated caffeine intake by at least one exposure level. A hypothetical 10-fold increase in risk was completely obscured when only coffee was used to estimate total caffeine intake. The results of this study suggest that measuring coffee instead of caffeine intake may contribute to a lack of positive findings in studies of coffee as a risk factor for disease occurrence, if in fact caffeine is the exposure of interest. On the other hand, measurement of coffee, tea, and cola soft drink intake in the present study appeared to approximate caffeine intake sufficiently and not affect risk estimates adversely.

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 · 10.1093/aje/153.8.815

Cites

36 of 36 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Gordis L. Consumption of methylxantine-containing bever- ages and risk of pancreatic cancer. Cancer Lett 1990;52:1-12.
  2. Nehlig A, Debry G. Effets du café et de la caféine sur la fertil- ité, la reproduction, la lactation et le développement. (In French). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1994;23:241-56.
  3. Barone JJ, Roberts HR. Caffeine consumption. Food Chem Toxicol 1996;34:119-29.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, J.
Affiliations
Cancer Care Ontario (CA)
Corresponding author
Brown, J.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2001-04-15
Volume
153
Issue
8
Pages
815-820
ISSN
0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126155091
Cited by
60
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Cancer Care Ontario
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
exposure misclassification, coffee consumption, caffeine consumption, dietary assessment, measurement error, risk estimation bias
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Caffeine, Coffee, Diet, Environmental Exposure, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Epidemiologic Studies

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