The Physiological, Cognitive, and Developmental Effects of Prenatal Caffeine Consumption on Foetal Pregnancy Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Maternal caffeine consumption during pregnancy may confer developmental risk to the foetus due to caffeine’s ability to cross the blood brain barrier (BBB) and blood placental barrier (BPB). This literature review investigated caffeine’s properties and mechanism of passage through the BBB and BPB. The subsequent effects of moderate-to-excessive maternal caffeine consumption (≥ 200mg of caffeine daily) on physical development, cognition, and behaviour were further explored. Methods: The review was conducted using PubMED, NCBI, and Google Scholar, using key terms such as “pregnancy”, “caffeine”, “prenatal”, “adverse effect”, “development”, and “embryo development”. Articles selected were published within the last 15 years (2008-2023) and longitudinal studies, cohort studies, and experimental methods using animal models were included. Results: It was found prenatal caffeine exposure poses a variety of potential consequences for the infant prior to and after delivery. Notably, physical developmental risks include fetal growth restriction, birth defect(s), and changes in neuronal structure and blood flow. Cognitive and behavioural consequences include possible links to externalizing behaviour problems, decreased intelligence quotient (IQ), attentive deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) during childhood. Discussion: This research is primarily restricted to animal models and cohort studies. Moroever, there were several conflicting conclusions surrounding behavioural and cognitive effects of prenatal caffeine exposure. This drives inquiry into how further research can both solidify causal relationships and be conducted ethically to help inform parents about the potential risks of prenatal caffeine exposure. Conclusion: With a global trend of increasing caffeine consumption, through coffee, black tea, and recently, matcha, this review provided insight into this ever-growing aspect of our lifestyles. It is paramount to understand the effect of caffeine on foetuses to promote safe and healthy pregnancy outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".