ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2024
Threshold effects between caffeine intake and urine flow rate: a population-based cross-sectional study.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe potential benefits of caffeine intake are currently receiving much attention and exploration. Urine flow rate (UFR) is an objective index to comprehensively reflect bladder function. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between caffeine intake and UFR using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) database.
methods14,142 participants were enrolled in this study. Weighted multivariate adjusted regression models were used to explore the relationship between caffeine intake and UFR. The dose-response relationships were explored using a restricted cubic spline (RCS) and a threshold effect analysis was conducted based on the inflection points identified by the two-segment linear regression model. In addition, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were applied.
resultsThe findings suggested that the intake of caffeine was correlated with improved UFR [Model 3: 0.091 (0.057, 0.126), P value < 0.001]. In addition, the RCS supported a nonlinear relationship between them. The analysis of threshold effect further revealed a specific level of caffeine intake (34.51 mg/day) that exhibited a significant enhancement in UFR. Finally, through re-analyzing the data set obtained after multiple imputation (MI), we obtained similar results.
conclusionThis study found a nonlinear beneficial relationship between caffeine intake and UFR, and revealed the recommended intake of caffeine. The values varied by gender, race, education, and smoking status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39012583What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.