Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Cohort studies of coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

From: Does long-term coffee intake reduce type 2 diabetes mellitus risk?

Reference Experimental Protocol/ Follow-up (y) Subjects Dose (cups/d)† Results Relative Risk (95% Confidence Interval)
van Dam & Feskens, 2002[7] Prospective cohort/7 117111 M and W ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 0.79 (0.57-1.10)
    5-6 0.73 (0.53-1.01)
    ≥7 0.50 (0.35-0.72)
Saremi et al., 2003[20] Prospective cohort/11 2680 M and W 0 1 (reference)
   Pima Indians 1-2 0.92 (0.74-1.13)
    ≥3 1.01 (0.82-1.26)
Reunanen et al., 2003 [19]) Prospective cohort/16 19518 M and W ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 1.01 (0.81-1.27)
    5-6 0.98 (0.79-1.21)
    ≥7 0.92 (0.73-1.16)
Rosengren et al., 2004[10] Prospective cohort/18 1361 W ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 0.55 (0.32-0.95)
    5-6 0.39 (0.20-0.77)
    ≥7 0.48 (0.22-1.06)
Salazar-Martinez et al., 2004[8]     
-Health Professionals Follow-up Study Prospective cohort/12 41934 M 0 1 (reference)
    1-3 0.93 (0.80-1.08)
    4-5 0.71 (0.53-0.94)
    ≥6 0.46 (0.26-0.82)
-Nurses' Health Study Prospective cohort/18 84276 W 0 1 (reference)
    1-3 0.99 (0.90-1.08)
    4-5 0.70 (0.60-0.82)
    ≥6 0.71 (0.56-0.89)
Tuomilehto et al., 2004[11] Prospective cohort/12 14629 M and W ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 0.76 (0.57-1.01)
    5-6 0.54 (0.40-0.73)
    7-9 0.55 (0.37-0.81)
    ≥10 0.39 (0.24-0.64)
Carlsson et al., 2004[9] Prospective cohort/20 10652 M and W ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 0.70 (0.48-1.01)
    5-6 0.71 (0.50-1.01)
    ≥7 0.65 (0.44-0.96)
van Dam et al, 2004[63] Cross-sectional and prospective data/6 1312 M and W 5 Cross-sectional: lower fasting insulin concentrations but not with lower fasting glucose concentrations
Hoorn Study     
     Prospective:
    ≤2 1 (reference)
    3-4 0.94 (0.56-1.55)
    5-6 0.92 (0.53-1.61)
    ≥7 0.69 (0.31-1.51)
van Dam & Hu, 2005[21] Systematic review (9 cohorts) 193473 M and W ≤2 1 (reference)
    4-6 0.72 (0.62-0.83)
    ≥6 0.65 (0.54-0.78)
Greenberg et al., 2005[34] Prospective cohort/8.4 7006 M and W 2 Caffeinated 0.86 (0.75-0.99)
First National Health and Nutrition    2 Decaffeinated 0.58 (0.34-0.99)
Examination Survey Epidemiologic     Further analysis revealed that the decrease in DM2 risk only applied to those who had lost weight
Follow Up Study     
van Dam et al., 2006[13] Prospective cohort/10 88259 W 0 1 (reference)
Nurses' Health Study II    1 0.87 (0.73-1.03)
    2-3 0.58 (0.49-0.68)
    ≥4 0.53 (0.41-0.68)
Iso et al., 2006[6] Retrospective cohort/5 17413 M and W 0 1 (reference)
    1-2 0.93 (0.73-1.19)
    ≥3 0.58 (0.37-0.90)
Pereira et al., 2006[14] Prospective/11 28812 W 0 1 (reference)
Iowa Women's Study    1-3 1.01 (0.85-1.19)
    ≥6 0.78 (0.61-1.01)
    Decaffeinated 0.67 (0.42-1.08)
    Caffeinated 0.79 (0.59-1.05)
Smith et al., 2006[18] Prospective/8 910 M and W Never 1 (reference)
Rancho Bernardo    Former 0.36 (0.19-0.68)
    Current 0.38 (0.17-0.87)
Paynter et al., 2006[5] Prospective/12 12204 M and W ≥4 M: 0.77 (0.61-0.98)
ARIC Study     
Schulze et al., 2007[64] Prospective/7 25167 M and W 150 g/d 0.96 (0.93-0.99)
EPIC-Potsdam     
Hamer et al., 2008[35] Prospective/11.7 5823 M and W 0 1 (reference)
Whitehall II Study    <1 0.83 (0.60-1.14)
    2-3 0.85(0.60-1.20)
    >3 0.80(0.54-1.18)
Odegaard et al., 2008[65] Prospective/6 36908 M and W 0 1 (reference)
Singapore Chinese Health Study    1 0.96 (0.86, 1.08)
    2-3 0.90 (0.79, 1.02)
    ≥4 0.70 (0.53-0.93)
  1. M: Men; W: Women; †: ~150 mL cup.