Cited by 111Coffee research and impactsAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 128 of the 133 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; 1 of the 89 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Effect of Caffeine Consumption on the Risk for Neurological and Psychiatric Disorders: Sex Differences in Human

Open access

Abstract

Caffeine occurs naturally in various foods, such as coffee, tea, and cocoa, and it has been used safely as a mild stimulant for a long time. However, excessive caffeine consumption (1~1.5 g/day) can cause caffeine poisoning (caffeinism), which includes symptoms such as anxiety, agitation, insomnia, and gastrointestinal disorders. Recently, there has been increasing interest in the effect of caffeine consumption as a protective factor or risk factor for neurological and psychiatric disorders. Currently, the importance of personalized medicine is being emphasized, and research on sex/gender differences needs to be conducted. Our review focuses on the effect of caffeine consumption on several neurological and psychiatric disorders with respect to sex differences to provide a better understanding of caffeine use as a risk or protective factor for those disorders. The findings may help establish new strategies for developing sex-specific caffeine therapies.

Verified 2026-10-10 · 1 reference not checked yet

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review summarizes sex differences in the prevalence/incidence of several neurological and psychiatric disorders and in caffeine’s risk or protective effects. It concludes that caffeine’s benefits and risks vary by sex and sometimes by age, but that few studies directly analyze sex/gender differences.

Key findings

  • Sex differences in disease burden are reported: stroke incidence/prevalence is generally higher in men, but stroke mortality is higher in women (24.7% vs. 19.7%); chronic insomnia is higher in women (12.9% vs. 6.2%); two-thirds of Alzheimer’s disease patients are women; Parkinson’s disease is more common in men (approximate ratio 2:1); depression and anxiety are generally more common in women.
  • Caffeine’s effects differ by sex: stroke protection appears greater in women; dementia risk reduction appears greater in women; Parkinson’s disease protection appears greater in men; sleep disturbance risk increases similarly in both sexes.
  • For depression, >2 cups/day was associated with a 24% lower incidence versus no coffee, and women with the highest caffeine intake (≥550 mg/d) had lower depression risk than those with <100 mg/d. For anxiety, effects were more pronounced in men, especially adolescent boys.
  • Caffeine poisoning is noted at excessive intake of 1~1.5 g/day; average US adult intake is 179 mg/day, and caffeine half-life is 2–10 h (average 3.7 h).

Methods

  • Narrative review of human studies on sex differences in the prevalence/incidence of neurological and psychiatric disorders and on caffeine consumption as a risk or protective factor.
  • Synthesizes epidemiological, cohort, case-control, and some trial evidence across stroke, sleep disorder, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, depression, anxiety, and neuromuscular disease, with findings summarized in Table 1 and Table 2.
  • Main analysis is qualitative, disorder-by-disorder comparison of effects in men versus women; no new primary data are collected.

Limitations

  • The paper states that few studies have analyzed individual sex/gender differences in caffeine’s effects on neurological disorders, that some results are controversial (e.g., stroke), and that further studies are needed for sex-specific caffeine strategies.
  • The paper states that little research exists on caffeine and anxiety, and on sex differences and mechanisms in neuromuscular disease.
  • Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not report a systematic search, formal quality appraisal, or meta-analysis, and it relies heavily on observational studies that may be confounded by age, hormones, lifestyle, and other factors.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/nu12103080

Cites

128 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

78 Not checked yet · 20 Own interpretation · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 88 references — free account
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 10
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 43
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
48 of 48
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Women live longer than men.

    “Age is a major risk factor for AD, and on average, women live longer than men.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few studies have been reported on sex differences in the effects of caffeine on neurological and psychiatric disorders.

    “However, few studies have been reported on sex differences in the effects of caffeine on neurological and psychiatric disorders.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few studies have been conducted on the incidence of anxiety in men and women by caffeine.

    “However, few studies have been conducted on the incidence of anxiety in men and women, by caffeine.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There are not many research articles that analyzed individual sex/gender differences in the effect of caffeine on neurological disorders.

    “Moreover, there are not many research articles that analyzed individual sex/gender differences in the effect of caffeine on neurological disorders.”
4 of 4

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

5 of 5

Citations

Cites

Show all 133 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Institute of Medicine (2001). Caffeine for the Sustainment of Mental Task Performance, The National Academies Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 111

Metadata

Authors
Jee, H. J., Lee, S. G., Bormate, K. J., & Jung, Y.-S.
Affiliations
Ajou University (KR)
Corresponding author
Jung, Yi-Sook
Venue
Nutrients
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-10-09
Volume
12
Issue
10
Pages
3080
ISSN
2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3092318674
Cited by
111
References
133
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Ministry of Health and Welfare (HI18C0920)
  • Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea (WISET202003GI01)
  • Ministry of Education (2018R1D1A1B07048729)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
caffeine consumption, caffeine poisoning, neurological disorders, mental illness, sex differences, gender differences, protective factors, risk factors, personalized medicine, anxiety, insomnia
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Mental Disorders, Caffeine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nervous System Diseases, Risk Factors, Sex Characteristics, Risk Assessment, Young Adult

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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