Maternal caffeine consumption during pregnancy and risk of low birth weight: a dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies
Open accessAbstract
Epidemiologic studies have shown inconsistent conclusions about the effect of caffeine intake during pregnancy on the risk of low birth weight (LBW). We performed a meta-analysis and linear-dose response analysis examining the association between caffeine consumption during pregnancy and risk of LBW. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles published up to March 2014. Eight cohort and four case-control studies met all inclusion criteria. Using a random-effects model of the twelve studies, the pooled odds ratio (OR) for the risk of LBW comparing the highest versus lowest level of caffeine intake during pregnancy was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.73). Linear dose-response analysis showed that every additional 100 mg of caffeine intake (1 cup of coffee or 2 cups of tea) per day during pregnancy was associated with a 3.0% increase in OR for LBW. There was a moderate level of overall heterogeneity with an I-squared value of 55% (95% CI: 13, 76%), and no evidence of publication bias based on Egger's test (P = 0.20) and the funnel plot. Thus, high caffeine intake during pregnancy is associated with a significant increase in the risk of LBW, and this risk appears to increase linearly as caffeine intake increases.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Several studies have reported a significant negative association between maternal caffeine consumption and birth weight.
“Several studies have reported a significant negative association between maternal caffeine consumption and birth weight (84, 85, 140–142).”
From The Safety of Ingested Caffeine: A Comprehensive Review (2017) · cites this paper as [142]
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 [142]
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 [142]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 111
- Authors
- Rhee, J., Kim, R., Kim, Y., Tam, M., Lai, Y., Keum, N., & Oldenburg, C. E.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rhee, Jongeun
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2015-07-20
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e0132334
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4507998
- OpenAlex
- W1561292899
- Cited by
- 111
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5
- FWCI
- 1.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
- National Institute of Mental Health (R25MH083620)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA013911)
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (T32AI007535)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Keywords
- maternal caffeine consumption, pregnancy, low birth weight, dose-response relationship, coffee consumption, tea consumption, prenatal exposure, birth weight
- MeSH terms
- Birth Weight, Caffeine, Coffee, Female, Humans, Infant, Low Birth Weight, Infant, Newborn, Pregnancy
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
