Temporal patterns of caffeine intake in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate whether caffeine intake among adolescents and adults in the U.S. varies across the week or throughout the day, data from a 7-day online beverage consumption survey (2010-2011) were analyzed. Mean (206.8-213.0 mg/day) and 90th percentile (437.4-452.6 mg/day) daily caffeine intakes among consumers 13 years and older were relatively constant across the week with no marked difference among weekdays versus weekend days. Percent consumers of caffeinated beverages likewise remained stable across the week. Mean daily caffeine intake for coffee and energy drink consumers 13 years and older was higher than contributions for tea and carbonated soft drink consumers. Caffeinated beverage consumers (13 + yrs) consumed most of their caffeine in the morning (61% versus 21% and 18% in the afternoon and evening) which was driven by coffee. Caffeinated beverage consumption patterns among adolescents (13-17 yrs) - who typically consume less daily caffeine - were more evenly distributed throughout the day. These findings provide insight into U.S. temporal caffeine consumption patterns among specific caffeinated beverage consumers and different age brackets. These data suggest that while caffeine intakes do not vary from day-to-day, mornings generally drive the daily caffeine intake of adults and is predominantly attributed to coffee.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".