Key result
Loneliness and low social support were not associated with incident hypertension overall, but increased risk in males (RD 0.038; 95% CI 0.002-0.075) and Gay/Lesbian adults (RD 0.108).
Why the study?
Although social isolation is known to impact individuals with cardiovascular disease, its relationship with incident hypertension in older, normotensive populations remained unclear.
Does exposure to loneliness and low social support increase the risk of incident hypertension in normotensive adults aged 50+ years?
Cohort (n=24,720)
Yes
Does exposure to loneliness and low social support increase the risk of incident hypertension in normotensive adults aged 50+ years?
Effect estimate: RD 0.038 (socially isolated males); RD 0.108 (Gay or Lesbian participants) (95% CI 0.002 to 0.075 (males); 0.011 to 0.205 (Gay or Lesbian))
While loneliness and low social support were not associated with incident hypertension in the overall older normotensive population, causal forest machine learning identified a significantly elevated risk of incident hypertension among socially isolated male and Gay or Lesbian subgroups.
Although social isolation is known to impact those with cardiovascular disease, its relationship with incident hypertension is unclear. In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from the All of Us research program. Participants were enrolled between May 2017-April 2023, aged 50+ years, and had at least 60-days of EHR data pre-index date. We identified incident hypertension during follow-up. Those classified as hypertensive at or prior to the index date were excluded. We defined low social support and loneliness as binary variables. Using causal forests, we estimated treatment effects as unweighted and overlap-weighted risk differences (RD). A total of 24,720 participants with a median follow-up of 2.6 years were included. While loneliness and social support were not significantly associated with incident hypertension in the overall population, causal forests revealed meaningful effect heterogeneity, with socially isolated male (RD: 0.038, 95% CI 0.002 to 0.075; overlap-weighted RD: 0.027, 95% CI -0.005 to 0.059) and Gay or Lesbian participants (RD: 0.108, 95% CI 0.011 to 0.205; overlap-weighted RD: 0.11, 95% CI 0.008 to 0.211) experiencing a significantly elevated risk. This illustrates how machine learning, when embedded within epidemiologic frameworks, can detect subgroup vulnerability that other approaches may obscure, enabling targeting of limited resources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nielsen et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Incident hypertension (n=24,720). Loneliness and low social support vs. Adequate social support and no loneliness was evaluated on Incident hypertension (RD 0.038 (socially isolated males); RD 0.108 (Gay or Lesbian participants), 95% CI 0.002 to 0.075 (males); 0.011 to 0.205 (Gay or Lesbian)). Loneliness and low social support were not associated with incident hypertension overall, but increased risk in males (RD 0.038; 95% CI 0.002-0.075) and Gay/Lesbian adults (RD 0.108).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: