↓ Skip to main content

Executive summary of NIH workshop on the Use and Biology of Energy Drinks: Current Knowledge and Critical Gaps

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Reviews, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Executive summary of NIH workshop on the Use and Biology of Energy Drinks: Current Knowledge and Critical Gaps
Published in
Nutrition Reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1111/nure.12154
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barbara C Sorkin, Kathryn M Camp, Carol J Haggans, Patricia A Deuster, Lynne Haverkos, Padma Maruvada, Ellen Witt, Paul M Coates

Abstract

Sales of energy drinks in the United States reached $12.5 billion in 2012. Emergency department visits related to consumption of these products have increased sharply, and while these numbers remain small relative to product sales, they raise important questions regarding biological and behavioral effects. Although some common ingredients of energy drinks have been extensively studied (e.g., caffeine, B vitamins, sugars, inositol), data on other ingredients (e.g., taurine) are limited. Summarized here are data presented elsewhere in this issue on the prevalence and patterns of caffeine-containing energy drink use, the effects of these products on alertness, fatigue, cognitive functions, sleep, mood, homeostasis, as well as on exercise physiology and metabolism, and the biological mechanisms mediating the observed effects. There are substantial data on the effects of some energy drink ingredients, such as caffeine and sugars, on many of these outcomes; however, even for these ingredients many controversies and gaps remain, and data on other ingredients in caffeine-containing energy drinks, and on ingredient interactions, are sparse. This summary concludes with a discussion of critical gaps in the data and potential next steps.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 21%
Psychology 14 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 9%
Sports and Recreations 5 6%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 19 23%