Cited by 147Coffee research and impactsPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsBirth, Development, and Health

Maternal caffeine intake during pregnancy is associated with risk of low birth weight: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

Open access
Chen, Ling-Wei, Wu, Yi, Neelakantan, Nithya, Chong, Mary Foong-Fong, Pan, An, van Dam, Rob M·2014·BMC Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Considerable controversy exists regarding the relation between maternal caffeine intake during pregnancy and risk of low birth weight (birth weight <2,500 g). We aim to assess this association using a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. METHODS: Potential articles were identified by searching MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases through 17 July 2013. Two authors independently extracted information on study design, participant characteristics and estimates of associations. Random-effects models were used to derive the summary relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Dose-response relationships were assessed using generalized least-squares trend estimation. RESULTS: In our meta-analysis, we included 13 prospective studies: 9 with low birth weight as a binary outcome variable (90,747 participants and 6,303 cases) and 6 with birth weight as a continuous outcome variable (10,015 participants; 2 studies reported both types of outcomes). Compared with the reference category with no or very low caffeine intake, the RR (95% CI) of low birth weight was 1.13 (1.06 to 1.21; I 2 0.0%) for low intake (50 to 149 mg/day), 1.38 (1.18 to 1.62; I 2 31.9%) for moderate intake (150 to 349 mg/day), and 1.60 (1.24 to 2.08; I 2 65.8%) for high intake (≥350 mg/day). In the dose-response analysis, each 100-mg/day increment in maternal caffeine intake (around one cup of coffee) was associated with 13% (RR 1.13, 1.06 to 1.21) higher risk of low birth weight. The association persisted in strata defined according to various study characteristics. Moderate (-33 g, 95% CI -63 to -4; I 2 0.3%) and high (-69 g, 95% CI -102 to -35; I 2 0.0%) caffeine intakes were also associated with a significantly lower birth weight as compared with the reference category. CONCLUSIONS: Higher maternal caffeine intake during pregnancy was associated with a higher risk of delivering low birth weight infants. These findings support recommendations to restrict caffeine intake during pregnancy to low levels.

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 · 10.1186/s12916-014-0174-6

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • Both meta-analyses found an increased risk of low-birth weight offspring for every 100 mg/day increase in maternal caffeine consumption (OR, 1.03-1.62).

    “Furthermore, both meta-analyses found an increased risk of low-birth weight offspring for every 100 mg/day increase in maternal caffeine consumption (OR, 1.03–1.62).”

    From The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review (2017) · cites this paper as [146]

  • Two separate meta-analyses reported odds ratios of having a newborn classified as low-birth weight for maternal caffeine consumption above 50 mg/day when compared to intakes below 50 mg/day.

    “Two separate meta-analyses of different sets of studies by Rhee et al. (142) and Chen et al. (146) reported odds ratios of having a newborn classified as low-birth weight (less than 2,500 g) for maternal caffeine consumption above 50 mg/day when compared to intakes below 50 mg/day.”

    From The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review (2017) · cites this paper as [146]

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: 1

  1. [18]Scopus S Content Coverage Guide 2011 Amsterdam, Netherlands Elsevier BV

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, L.-W., Wu, Y., Neelakantan, N., Chong, M. F.-F., Pan, A., & van Dam, R. M.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • Agency for Science, Technology and Research (SG)
Venue
BMC Medicine
Published
2014-09-19
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
174-174
ISSN
1741-7015 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058812183
Cited by
147
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Birth, Development, and Health
Keywords
maternal caffeine intake, pregnancy, low birth weight, dose-response relationship, caffeine consumption, birth weight
MeSH terms
Birth Weight, Caffeine, Female, Humans, Infant, Low Birth Weight, Infant, Newborn, Male, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Prospective Studies, 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