Risk factors for chronic hypertension 5 years after a pregnancy complicated by preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 30% of women with a history of preeclampsia develop chronic hypertension within 10 years of pregnancy. This systematic review summarizes risk factors before, during, and immediately after pregnancy for the development of chronic hypertension 5 years after preeclampsia. Databases were searched with terms 'preeclampsia' and 'postpartum hypertension' or 'cardiovascular disease' up to 30th October 2023. Observational studies reporting chronic hypertension more than 5 years after preeclampsia were included. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Wherever possible, a meta-analysis was conducted. Twenty-one cohort and five case-control studies, with a median quality score of 8/10, were included, involving 197 793 patients and reporting 32 risk factors. Preeclampsia in a subsequent pregnancy is associated with chronic hypertension [risk ratio (RR) 2.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-3.22, n = 45 626]. Other significant risk factors include early-onset of preeclampsia (<34 weeks gestation), maternal BMI, blood pressure, diabetes, and family history of hypertension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".