| Title |
Caffeine Use Disorder: A Review of the Evidence and Future Implications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Addiction Reports, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40429-014-0024-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Merideth A. Addicott |
| Abstract |
The latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) has introduced new provisions for caffeine-related disorders. Caffeine Withdrawal is now an officially recognized diagnosis, and criteria for caffeine use disorder have been proposed for additional study. caffeine use disorder is intended to be characterized by cognitive, behavioral, and physiological symptoms indicative of caffeine use despite significant caffeine-related problems, similar to other Substance Use Disorders. However, since nonproblematic caffeine use is so common and widespread, it may be difficult for some health professionals to accept that caffeine use can result in the same types of pathological behaviors caused by alcohol, cocaine, opiates, or other drugs of abuse. Yet there is evidence that some individuals are psychologically and physiologically dependent on caffeine, although the prevalence and severity of these problems is unknown. This article reviews the recent changes to the DSM, the concerns regarding these changes, and some potential impacts these changes could have on caffeine consumers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 3% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 3% |
| Georgia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 28 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 33 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 21% |
| Psychology | 13 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 21% |
| Unknown | 35 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 142. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 March 2024.
All research outputs
#295,286
of 25,711,998 outputs
Outputs from Current Addiction Reports
#8
of 390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,347
of 242,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Addiction Reports
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 242,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.