Various carbonated soft drinks kept for sale at a hypermarket shelf

(Credit: © MSM - stock.adobe.com)

Small Soda Habit, Measurable Brain Difference in Kids

In A Nutshell

  • As little as one cup of soda a week was linked to smaller total brain surface area in 9,632 American kids ages 9 to 11.
  • Soda stood out as the main source of the link, coffee was tied to a thinner cortex, and tea showed no link.
  • Shorter sleep explained part of the connection and helped account for more mental health problems six months later.
  • A link is not proof of harm, but the authors call for clear caffeine guidelines for adolescents.

A soda with lunch hardly registers as a health decision. But as little as one cup of soda a week was linked to smaller overall brain surface area in kids, according to a new study of 9,632 American children ages 9 to 11. Researchers at King’s College London found that kids who consumed more caffeine, mostly from soda, had less surface area across the brain’s outer layer, a pattern that showed up in 22 separate brain regions.

One cup sits well below the daily caffeine limits health agencies in the U.S., Canada, and Europe have set, and few places have rules aimed specifically at teens. The authors note that the developing brain in early adolescence may be especially sensitive to caffeine, with possible ties to sleep and, eventually, mental health.

Slated to appear in Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, the study went beyond brain scans to ask whether shorter sleep helps explain the link, and whether sleep and brain structure together connect to mental health symptoms six and eighteen months later.

Researchers Tracked Caffeine, Sleep, and Brain Scans in Thousands of Kids

Data came from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, a long-running U.S. project that recruited more than 11,800 children at 21 sites and deliberately included groups often left out of research. This analysis covered 9,632 kids with usable brain scans and complete background data, 51.6% of them boys.

Kids reported how many cups of coffee or espresso, caffeinated tea, and caffeinated soft drinks they typically had each week over the previous six months. Parents reported nightly sleep, which averaged about nine hours. Brain scans measured the cortex, the brain’s wrinkled outer layer, in two ways: how thick it is and how much surface it covers. Six and eighteen months later, kids filled out a questionnaire on attention, emotional, and behavior problems. Researchers accounted for mental health at the start, along with family income, parents’ education, age, and sex.

Caffeine and Kids’ Brain Health
New research ties soda to smaller brain surface area in children, with sleep playing a part. (Image by StudyFinds)

Soda Tied to Smaller Brain Surface Area, Coffee to a Thinner Outer Layer

Kids who consumed more caffeine had less brain surface area overall, and the difference appeared in 22 regions across all four lobes, including areas involved in sleep, mood, and self-control. Total surface area was already smaller at one cup a week, for caffeine overall and for soda specifically. That one-cup test covered the brain as a whole, not individual regions, and since most kids drank little caffeine, the authors say it needs confirming in other studies.

Soda stood out. Alone, it was tied to smaller surface area in 19 regions, and the authors wrote that the findings were “largely driven by soft drink intake.” Kids averaged about 1.2 cups of soda a week versus 0.2 cups of coffee, making soda their main caffeine source. Sugar may play a part too, since the researchers say it could influence brain development, and earlier research links heavy soda drinking to other less healthy habits. Caffeine, sugar, and lifestyle could not be pulled apart.

Coffee and espresso told a different story. Higher intake was tied to a thinner cortex, including four frontal areas involved in decision-making and impulse control, but not to smaller surface area. Coffee was rare among these kids, which limits how much weight that result can bear. Tea showed no link to any brain measure.

Kids who consumed more caffeine slept fewer hours, and the researchers’ calculations showed shorter sleep explained part of the link between caffeine, especially soda, and smaller surface area. Only part, since caffeine stayed tied to brain structure even with sleep factored in.

Coffee was the exception. Sleep did not explain its link to a thinner cortex, and the authors speculate that timing may be why: coffee is usually a morning drink, leaving hours for caffeine to clear before bed, while soda often shows up later in the day. A soda with dinner or during homework, for instance, leaves far less time to wear off. Nobody recorded when kids drank anything, so the idea remains untested.

Shorter sleep and smaller surface area together also helped account for why kids who consumed more caffeine and soda reported more mental health problems six months later. By eighteen months, only total surface area did, not individual regions. These effects were small, and sleep itself was tied to mental health apart from brain structure.

Caffeine came from kids’ own reports, sleep from parents, and brain scans were taken once, so the study cannot show that caffeine caused any brain difference. A smaller surface area does not by itself mean damage, and the study did not test whether the differences affect how kids think or learn.

Few parents think twice about a weekly soda, and nothing here proves they should. The authors add that checking a young person’s caffeine use may be relevant when sleep problems or early mental health symptoms show up. And a link showing up at such low intake across nearly 10,000 children makes their call for clear, evidence-based caffeine guidelines for adolescents hard to wave off.


Disclaimer: This article reports on a single observational study that has been accepted for publication but has not yet appeared in its final form. It is for general information only and is not medical advice. Parents with questions about a child’s caffeine intake, sleep, or mental health should talk with a pediatrician or other qualified health professional.


Paper Notes

Limitations

Participants came only from the United States, so results may not apply to countries with different diets and habits. Children in the analysis drank less caffeine, slept longer, came from families with higher socioeconomic status, and reported fewer mental health problems than excluded children, which narrows how widely the results apply. Caffeine intake was self-reported, and sleep was reported by parents at ages 9 to 10, a method that usually overestimates sleep, although the authors say this would likely bias results toward finding no link. Caffeine was counted in cups, without distinguishing brands or drink types whose caffeine and sugar content vary, and kids may not always tell caffeinated sodas from non-caffeinated ones. Caffeine intake was heavily skewed, with most kids drinking little, which limited the ability to detect associations and means the one-cup threshold results need to be confirmed by other studies. The design was partly a single snapshot in time, so cause and direction cannot be established, and other factors such as diet, health habits, stress, and hardship could not be fully ruled out. Deeper brain regions beneath the cortex were not examined, and the biological mechanisms were not tested.

Funding and Disclosures

Neither author reports any biomedical financial interests or potential conflicts of interest. Dr. Divyangana Rakesh acknowledges support from a Young Investigator Grant from the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation, a New Investigator Research Grant from the UKRI Medical Research Council, and the CIFAR Global Scholars Program. The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study is supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health and additional federal partners. The funders had no role in the design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript preparation, or in the decision to submit for publication.

Publication Details

Title: “Caffeine Consumption and Adolescent Mental Health: The Role of Sleep and Brain Structure.” Authors: Jiayi Zheng and Divyangana Rakesh (corresponding author), Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK. Journal: Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging (2026), journal pre-proof, received April 10, 2026, accepted September 22, 2026; the final version may differ. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2026.09.011. Data source: ABCD Study, Data Release 5.1, DOI: 10.15154/z563-zd2.

About StudyFinds Analysis

Called "brilliant," "fantastic," and "spot on" by scientists and researchers, our acclaimed StudyFinds Analysis articles are created using an exclusive AI-based model with complete human oversight by the StudyFinds Editorial Team. For these articles, we use an unparalleled LLM process across multiple systems to analyze entire journal papers, extract data, and create accurate, accessible content. Our writing and editing team proofreads and polishes each and every article before publishing. With recent studies showing that artificial intelligence can interpret scientific research as well as (or even better) than field experts and specialists, StudyFinds was among the earliest to adopt and test this technology before approving its widespread use on our site. We stand by our practice and continuously update our processes to ensure the very highest level of accuracy. Read our AI Policy (link below) for more information.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

John Anderer

Associate Editor