The Prevalence of Hypertension Among Children and Antihypertensive Use: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early-onset hypertension (HT) presents compounded risks for cardiovascular, renal, and other systemic complications. Childhood HT is associated with HT during adulthood and detrimental lifelong cardiovascular disease events. However, most of the cases are not detectable as HT measurement in children is complicated and unstable. The global prevalence of HT among children is rapidly increasing. A previous study (2019) reported that the pooled global HT prevalence is 4.0% and the number is believed to be elevated. However, prevalence estimates of childhood HT have rarely been synthesized globally. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically pool all evidence from published articles and synthesize the evidence on the global prevalence of childhood HT and antihypertensive (anti-HT) use among children and its effects. METHODS: This systematic review of observational and experimental studies will investigate the overall prevalence of HT and anti-HT use among children. We will search articles from 4 web-based databases: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and Scopus using the specific keywords across the databases. During the article search conducted until October 2024, we retrieved 14,575 articles. Articles published in the English language with full text and are peer-reviewed journals included children aged between 0 and 18 years, confirmed with HT or high blood pressure (BP) on at least 3 separate occasions, and stated the definition of HT will be included in this protocol. Study selection and reporting will follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines and Cochrane Risk of bias tool (ACROBAT) for experimental studies. Data will be extracted using a standardized data extraction form using Microsoft Excel software and the studies' quality will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's guideline according to the study design. We will use STATA software (version 17.0; StataCorp LLC) to calculate the global pooled prevalence and RevMan software (version 5.4; StataCorp LLC) to observe the effect of anti-HT use and BP among children. The risk of bias will be assessed using a funnel plot. RESULTS: We retrieved 14,575 articles from 4 databases in October 2024. We will report the current global overall or pooled prevalence of HT as well as by region, risk factors, anti-HT use, and the anti-HT BP-lowering effect among the general children population. The findings will be presented in summary table findings and forest plot. This review is expected to be completed in the middle of 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This review will provide a comprehensive synthesis of the overall prevalence of HT among children-a public health issue of growing concern with long-term impact. This review will also provide important information to inform practice in developing effective strategies for preventing and managing childhood HT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024500248; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024500248. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/65807.
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 | 0.068 | 0.093 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.065 | 0.006 |
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".