Cited by 166Coffee research and impactsBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesSodium Intake and Health

Habitual coffee consumption and risk of hypertension: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective observational studies

Open access
Zhang, Zhenzhen, Hu, Gang, Caballero, Benjamin, Appel, Lawrence, Chen, Liwei·2011·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background In 2 meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, increased coffee intake was associated with slightly higher blood pressure. However, these trials were short in duration (<85 d).Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses of long-term prospective studies that examined the association of habitual coffee consumption with risk of hypertension.Design We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Agricola, and Cochrane Library) through August 2009 with the use of a standardized protocol. Eligible studies were prospective cohort trials that examined the association of coffee consumption with incident hypertension or blood pressure.Results From 6 prospective cohort studies, a total of 172,567 participants and 37,135 incident hypertension cases were included. Mean follow-up ranged from 6.4 to 33.0 y. Compared with the lowest consumption [<1 cup (≈237 mL)/d], the pooled relative risks (RRs) for hypertension were 1.09 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.18) for the next higher category (1-3 cups/d), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.20) for the second highest category (3-5 cups/d), and 1.08 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.21) for the highest category (>5 cups/d). A dose-response meta-analysis showed an inverse "J-shaped" curve (P for quadratic term < 0.001) with hypertension risk increasing up to 3 cups/d (RR for comparison of 3 with 0 cups/d: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.20) and decreasing with higher intakes (RR for comparison of 6 with 0 cups/d: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.89, 1.10).Conclusion The results suggest that habitual coffee consumption of >3 cups/d was not associated with an increased risk of hypertension compared with <1 cup/d; however, a slightly elevated risk appeared to be associated with light-to-moderate consumption of 1 to 3 cups/d.

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 · 10.3945/ajcn.110.004044

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Compared with the reference category, the pooled RR for hypertension was 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.18) for low coffee consumption (one to three cups/day).

    “Compared with the reference category, the pooled RRs (95 % CI) for hypertension were 1.09 (1.01-1.18)for the low category (one to three cups per day)”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Zhang et al., 2011

  • In a dose-response meta-analysis, the best-fitting model showed an inverse J-shaped curve (p for quadratic <0.001), with risk of hypertension increasing up to three cups/day (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97-1.20) and decreasing with higher intake (RR for six cups vs zero: 0.99, 95% CI 0.89-1.10).

    “In a dose-response meta-analysis, the best-fitting model showed an inverse “J-shaped” curve (p for quadratic term < 0.001), with the risk of hypertension increasing up to three cups per day (RR for the comparison of three cups with zero cups per day: 1.07, 95 % CI = 0.97-1.20)and decreasing with higher intake (RR for the comparison of six cups with zero cups per day: 0.99, 95 % CI = 0.89-1.10).”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Zhang et al., 2011

  • Long-term heavy coffee consumption has been associated with a slightly elevated risk of hypertension and a higher level of plasma homocysteine.

    “Long-term heavy coffee consumption has been associated with a slightly elevated risk of hypertension,40 and a higher level of plasma homocysteine.41, 42”

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. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283:2008-12.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, Z., Hu, G., Caballero, B., Appel, L., & Chen, L.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-06
Volume
93
Issue
6
Pages
1212-1219
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165238637
Cited by
166
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
Keywords
coffee consumption, hypertension, blood pressure, dose-response relationship, J-curve, hypertension incidence, habitual dietary intake, prospective cohort
MeSH terms
Coffee, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Hypertension, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors

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