Prevalence of nocturnal and isolated nocturnal hypertension in population-based studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 1Facultad de Medicina (FAMED), Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas (UNTRM), Chachapoyas
Abstract
Background: Nocturnal hypertension (NH) and isolated nocturnal hypertension (INH) require nighttime blood pressure assessment, but published prevalence estimates differ in sampling, treatment eligibility, and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) protocols.
Objective: This study aimed to summarize NH and study-defined INH proportions in population/community samples.
Methods: Four databases were searched through 17 March 2026. Logit random-effects models used restricted maximum likelihood and modified Hartung–Knapp confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of bias was assessed using the nine-item Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) 2017 checklist. Clinical/occupational and circadian-pattern reports were described individually rather than pooled.
Results: Nine NH estimates from four sources included 8,282 participants and 3,331 cases. Pooled prevalence was 42.5% (95% CI, 33.2%–52.3%; approximate 95% prediction interval, 17.2%–72.3%; I ² = 97.6%). Four INH estimates included 3,659 participants and 657 cases; the descriptive pooled proportion was 17.3% (95% CI, 10.4%–27.5%; prediction interval, 3.6%–54.0%; I ² = 91.5%). INH denominators differed by treatment eligibility; a sensitivity analysis using reported non-treated denominators yielded 19.6% (95% CI, 11.4%–31.6%). Certainty was judged very low. A sensitivity requiring both original nighttime recording-quality criteria could not be estimated from the published aggregate data.
Conclusions: NH and INH were common in the population-based and community samples studied. These findings provide reference estimates for planning population-based studies and evaluating targeted detection strategies using ABPM.
Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251233166 , identifier PROSPERO CRD420251233166.
Related
- Prevalence and factors associated with pulmonary hypertension in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Prevalence of hypertension phenotypes in an urban population with low cardiovascular risk in Singapore: a cross-sectional study
- Prevalence and associated factors of malaria among general population in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- The TyG-WHtR index as a novel predictor of nocturnal hypertension in metabolic syndrome
- Prevalence of Insomnia in the General Population in Pakistan: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BibTeX
@article{veraponce2026prevalence,
title = {{Prevalence of nocturnal and isolated nocturnal hypertension in population-based studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
author = {Víctor Juan Vera-Ponce and Jhosmer Ballena-Caicedo and Lupita Ana Maria Valladolid-Sandoval and Fiorella E. Zuzunaga-Montoya},
journal = {Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fcvm.2026.1883404},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2026.1883404/full},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Prevalence of nocturnal and isolated nocturnal hypertension in population-based studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Víctor Juan Vera-Ponce
AU - Jhosmer Ballena-Caicedo
AU - Lupita Ana Maria Valladolid-Sandoval
AU - Fiorella E. Zuzunaga-Montoya
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/28
JO - Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
DO - 10.3389/fcvm.2026.1883404
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2026.1883404/full
AB - Background: Nocturnal hypertension (NH) and isolated nocturnal hypertension (INH) require nighttime blood pressure assessment, but published prevalence estimates differ in sampling, treatment eligibility, and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) protocols. Objective: This study aimed to summarize NH and study-defined INH proportions in population/community samples. Methods: Four databases were searched through 17 March 2026. Logit random-effects models used restricted maximum likelihood and modified Hartung–Knapp confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of bias was assessed using the nine-item Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) 2017 checklist. Clinical/occupational and circadian-pattern reports were described individually rather than pooled. Results: Nine NH estimates from four sources included 8,282 participants and 3,331 cases. Pooled prevalence was 42.5% (95% CI, 33.2%–52.3%; approximate 95% prediction interval, 17.2%–72.3%; I ² = 97.6%). Four INH estimates included 3,659 participants and 657 cases; the descriptive pooled proportion was 17.3% (95% CI, 10.4%–27.5%; prediction interval, 3.6%–54.0%; I ² = 91.5%). INH denominators differed by treatment eligibility; a sensitivity analysis using reported non-treated denominators yielded 19.6% (95% CI, 11.4%–31.6%). Certainty was judged very low. A sensitivity requiring both original nighttime recording-quality criteria could not be estimated from the published aggregate data. Conclusions: NH and INH were common in the population-based and community samples studied. These findings provide reference estimates for planning population-based studies and evaluating targeted detection strategies using ABPM. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251233166 , identifier PROSPERO CRD420251233166.
SN - 2297-055X
ER -