SynthesisBMC public health2026
Global prevalence of nocturnal hypertension: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNighttime blood pressure (BP) is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular events than daytime BP. However, the global prevalence of nocturnal hypertension across different populations has not been previously described. This review estimates the global prevalence of nocturnal hypertension, offering insights to guide clinical practice, healthcare planning and future research.
methodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus and included studies reporting the prevalence of nocturnal hypertension and non-dipping BP in adults, including studies published up to 12 December 2024. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. There were no language restrictions. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate pooled prevalence across study populations. The review was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025625712).
resultsA total of 449 studies were included. The prevalence of nocturnal hypertension was 45% (95% confidence interval (CI): 39-51, I2=97.4%) in the general population and was higher among individuals with hypertension (57%, 95%CI: 54-60, I2=84.7%), and high-risk patients including diabetes mellitus (56%, 95%CI: 38-72, I2=97.1%), obstructive sleep apnoea (60%, 95%CI: 42-78, I2=93.0%), chronic kidney disease (64%, 95%CI: 53-73, I2=95.2%). The prevalence of isolated nocturnal hypertension in the general population was 23% (95%CI: 14-34; I2= 93.8%), while the prevalence of non-dipping was 39% (95%CI: 34-45, I2=95.4%) in the general population and was higher among individuals with hypertension (48%, 95%CI: 46-50, I2=90.5%) and in high-risk populations, including patients with diabetes mellitus (52%, 95%CI: 44-59, I2=89.9%), obstructive sleep apnoea (63%, 95%CI: 47-76, I2=89.8%), and chronic kidney disease (58%, 95%CI: 54-61, I2=90.3%). Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies, and pooled prevalence estimates should be interpreted in the context of population and methodological differences.
conclusionNocturnal hypertension is common across populations and particularly prevalent among individuals with hypertension and high-risk conditions such as diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Despite available diagnostic tools and effective treatments to lower nighttime BP, it remains substantially underdiagnosed. Evidence demonstrating that targeted reduction of nocturnal BP improves long-term cardiovascular outcomes is still limited. Future work should focus on establishing the clinical effectiveness of screening, diagnosis, and treatment of nocturnal hypertension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.