Key result
Nocturnal hypertension affects ~43% of community populations in a pooled meta-analysis.
Why the study?
Published prevalence estimates for nocturnal hypertension and isolated nocturnal hypertension in population and community samples vary due to differences in sampling, treatment eligibility, and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring protocols.
Meta-Analysis (n=8,282)
Yes
Nocturnal hypertension (42.5%) and isolated nocturnal hypertension (17.3%) are highly prevalent in community-based samples assessed by 24-hour ABPM, providing reference estimates for planning population studies and targeted detection strategies despite high between-study heterogeneity.
High nocturnal hypertension prevalence may inform ABPM interpretation; extends reference estimates but leaves targeted detection strategies open due to very low certainty.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vera-Ponce et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Nocturnal hypertension and isolated nocturnal hypertension (n=8,282). 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was evaluated on Pooled prevalence of nocturnal hypertension (mean nighttime systolic BP >=120 mmHg and/or diastolic BP >=70 mmHg) (95% CI 33.2-52.3). Nocturnal hypertension had a pooled prevalence of 42.5% (95% CI, 33.2%–52.3%) and isolated nocturnal hypertension had a pooled proportion of 17.3% (95% CI, 10.4%–27.5%) in community samples.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: