Meta-analysis2016

Maternal caffeine intake during pregnancy and risk of pregnancy loss: a categorical and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

Chen LW, Wu Y, Neelakantan N, Chong MF, Pan A, van Dam RM

Public health nutrition · 58 citations

How it was studied

Design
Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Clinical events such as disease or death

Who paid for it

Funding
Independent funding
University or hospital
National University of Singapore

Based on 1 listed funder(s).

Publication

Published
2015-09-02 · Public Health Nutr · vol. 19 · issue 7 · pp. 1233–1244
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Cited
104 citations · more than 77% of similar papers · 1.2× the field average
References
80 works
Access
Free to read
Research areas
Coffee research and impacts · Gestational Diabetes Research and Management · Cancer Risks and Factors
Keywords
Medicine, Pregnancy, Confounding, Caffeine, Relative risk, Meta-analysis, Prospective cohort study, Obstetrics, Publication bias, Confidence interval, Internal medicine
MeSH
humans, abortion, spontaneous, caffeine, risk factors, pregnancy, dose-response relationship, drug, coffee, databases, factual, female

6 authors

From SG, US

  • Ling‐Wei Chen · correspondingNational University of Singapore; National University Health System
  • Yi Ming WuNational University of Singapore; National University Health System
  • Nithya NeelakantanNational University of Singapore; National University Health System
  • Mary Foong‐Fong ChongNational University of Singapore; Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences; National University Health System; Clinical Nutrition Research Centre
  • An PanNational University of Singapore; National University Health System
  • Rob M. van Dam · correspondingHarvard University; National University of Singapore; National University Health System

Abstract

Objective

To assess the association between maternal caffeine intake and risk of pregnancy loss using a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Design

Categorical and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Setting

Relevant articles were identified by searching MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases through 30 January 2015. Two authors independently extracted information from eligible studies. Random-effects models were used to derive the summary relative risks (RR) and corresponding 95% CI for specific categories of caffeine consumption and for a continuous association using generalized least-squares trend estimation.

Subjects

A total of 130 456 participants and 3429 cases in fourteen included studies.

Results

Compared with the reference category with no or very low caffeine intake, the RR (95% CI) of pregnancy loss was 1·02 (0·85, 1·24; I(2)=28·3%) for low intake (50-149 mg/d), 1·16 (0·94, 1·41; I 2=49·6%) for moderate intake (150-349 mg/d), 1·40 (1·16, 1·68; I(2)=18·6%) for high intake (350-699 mg/d) and 1·72 (1·40, 2·13; I(2)=0·0%) for very high intake (≥ 700 mg/d). In the dose-response analysis, each 100 mg/d increment in maternal caffeine intake (~1 cup of coffee) was associated with 7% (95% CI 3%, 12%) higher risk of pregnancy loss. Our results may have been affected by publication bias, but the association remained significant for the subset of larger studies. Furthermore, adjustment for smoking and pregnancy symptoms may have been incomplete, potentially resulting in residual confounding.

Conclusions

Albeit inconclusive, higher maternal caffeine intake was associated with a higher risk of pregnancy loss and adherence to guidelines to avoid high caffeine intake during pregnancy appears prudent.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.