Cited by 77Coffee research and impactsPregnancy and Medication ImpactReproductive System and Pregnancy

Caffeine and miscarriage risk

Savitz, David A., Chan, Ronna L., Herring, Amy H., Howards, Penelope P., Hartmann, Katherine E.·2008·Epidemiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coffee and caffeine have been inconsistently found to be associated with increased risk of clinical miscarriage-a potentially important association given the high prevalence of exposure. METHODS: Women were recruited before or early in pregnancy and interviewed regarding sources of caffeine, including assessment of changes over the perinatal period. We identified 2407 clinically-recognized pregnancies resulting in 258 pregnancy losses. We examined the relationship of coffee and caffeine intake with clinically-recognized pregnancy loss prior to 20 weeks' completed gestation, using a discrete-time continuation ratio logistic survival model. RESULTS: Coffee and caffeine consumption at all 3 time points were unrelated to total miscarriage risk and the risk of loss after the interview. Reported exposure at the time of the interview was associated with increased risk among those with losses before the interview. CONCLUSIONS: There is little indication of possible harmful effects of caffeine on miscarriage risk within the range of coffee and caffeine consumption reported, with a suggested reporting bias among women with losses before the interview. The results may reflect exposure misclassification and unmeasured heterogeneity of pregnancy losses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ede.0b013e31815c09b9

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • Savitz et al. reported no association among 2407 women who were interviewed regarding caffeine intake before experiencing spontaneous abortion.

    “However, Savitz et al. (128) reported no association among 2407 women who were interviewed regarding caffeine intake before experiencing spontaneous abortion (128).”

    From The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review (2017) · cites this paper as [128]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Savitz, D. A., Chan, R. L., Herring, A. H., Howards, P. P., & Hartmann, K. E.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Savitz, David A.
Venue
Epidemiology
Published
2008-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
55-62
ISSN
1044-3983 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1988293121
Cited by
77
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
7.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (ES 07018)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › 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, coffee consumption, miscarriage, perinatal exposure, exposure misclassification, reporting bias
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Adolescent, Adult, Caffeine, Coffee, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Middle Aged, North Carolina, Nutrition Surveys, Pregnancy, Risk Factors, Tennessee, Texas, Odds Ratio

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