If I'm reading correctly, the author multiplied the RR by the TOTAL NUMBER OF EVENTS to get the number of events attributable to caffeine consumption i.e. drinking 200mg caffeine per day is 28% increased risk, 1,000,000 miscarriages, therefore 280k caused by caffeine
-
-
Show this thread
-
There's actually a formula to do this properly, the population attributable fraction, but what the author has done here is...assume that 100% of the population who have had miscarriages drink 200mg of coffee/day???? That seems, uh, unlikely (it's 2-3 espressos)
Show this thread -
If I plug the numbers into the standard PAF calculation, with 20% of the population drinking this much caffeine a day (arbitrary but reasonable) PAF = 0.2(1-(1/1.28)) = 0.044 = 44,000 miscarriages/million attributable to caffeine
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I can’t even... column ii assumes a 2x dose of caffeine doubles the risk of adverse events. I can’t believe that. Just can’t.
-
Nah that's actually the most reasonable part of the table. If the relative risk increase is 14% per 100mg of caffeine then 200mg of caffeine should caused a 28% increased risk
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Is that the new paper on caffeine and pregnancy (only a few months after the review finding modest consumption safe)
-
Yeppppppppp Which review was that?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Worse, as far as i can tell the paper never quotes the absolute risks at all. How an any sense be made of that?
-
Yes it's very strange. The table seems to be mathematically and theoretically incomprehensible
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Cc
@sTeamTraen any idea? -
100mg per how often? It's about the amount of caffeine in a single coffee, I think. Why would the risk (only) exactly double with double the dose? Etc etc
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.