Cited by 6Coffee research and impactsBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized clinical trials on the effect of coffee consumption on heart rate

Han, Shufen, Qiu, Yue, Zhang, Gus Q, Lian, Fuzhi, Zhang, Weiguo·2024·Nutrition Reviews

Abstract

Context: Resting heart rate (HR) is increasingly recognized as an indicator of disease and overall morbidity and mortality. Whether chronic coffee consumption affects resting HR is an important consideration for individual consumers as well as from a public health perspective. Objective: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to examine the effectiveness of coffee consumption on resting HR. Data Sources: Original RCTs assessing the effect of coffee consumption on resting HR and published prior to March 2023 were identified by searching online databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Data Extraction and Analysis: Data searches and extraction and risk-of-bias assessments were performed according to the Cochrane guidelines, and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for systematic reviews were followed. Data on study characteristics, type, and amount of coffee and net change and measurement resting HR were extracted. A random-effects or a fixed-effects model was used to estimate the pooled effect sizes. Homogeneity was determined with the Cochran Q test, and publication bias was assessed through Begg’s test, Egger’s test, and funnel plots. Results: A total of 6 RCTs with 11 intervention trials or arms involving 485 individuals were included. The participants were generally healthy, although some had hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, or were overweight. The trial duration ranged from 2 weeks to 24 weeks. The overall pooled analysis showed that coffee consumption resulted in a negligible increase in resting HR of 0.40 beats per minute (95% CI: −0.78 to 1.57; P = 0.506), which was statistically insignificant. Subgroup analysis of all specified categories was consistent with the overall analysis. No heterogeneity was observed among included trials (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.756). Conclusion: The results of the present meta-analysis study demonstrate that daily coffee consumption of 3 to 6 cups for a period of 2 to 24 weeks has no statistically significant effect on resting HR.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/nutrit/nuad110

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 6

Authors
Han, S., Qiu, Y., Zhang, G. Q., Lian, F., & Zhang, W.
Affiliations
  • Hangzhou Normal University (CN)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • Las Colinas Institutes , Irving, TX, USA
Corresponding author
Zhang, Weiguo
Venue
Nutrition Reviews
Published
2023-08-30
Volume
82
Issue
8
Pages
1046-1055
ISSN
  • 0029-6643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1753-4887
OpenAlex
W4386278470
Cited by
6
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
0.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nutrition Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Scientific Research Foundation for Scholars of HZNU (2022QDL004)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
coffee consumption, resting heart rate, caffeine, cardiovascular risk, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, overweight
MeSH terms
Coffee, Heart Rate, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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