MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410877653 · doi:10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100519

Prevalence of newly diagnosed essential hypertension within one year postpartum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4410877653 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer D Kaminker, Alexandra MacMaster, Jessica Pudwell, Graeme N. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAJOG Global Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineSystematic reviewEssential hypertensionObstetricsMEDLINEInternal medicineBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Pregnancy induces a state of cardiovascular stress and can lead to long-lasting effects irrespective of complications in pregnancy. However, the magnitude of these effects needs to be clarified. This study seeks to determine the prevalence of newly diagnosed essential hypertension within one year postpartum among the obstetric population who experienced uncomplicated pregnancies. Data sources: A comprehensive search of the databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL was conducted for studies published up to March 2023. Study eligibility criteria: Studies that assessed healthy individuals between 12 weeks and one year postpartum with newly diagnosed essential hypertension (≥140/90) and without pregnancy complications were included. Case studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded, along with studies involving pregnant patients who were either less than three months or more than one year postpartum, those with pre-existing hypertension or pregnancy complications, or those with pre-existing medical conditions. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Meta-analyses using random-effects models calculated pooled prevalence estimates and examined mean arterial pressure, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure. Subgroup analyses considered the timing of blood pressure assessment, geographical location, and the presence of interventions. Results: In eight studies with 3070 participants, the prevalence of newly diagnosed hypertension was 2.96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15%-7.43%; I², 80%). No significant differences were observed in the subgroup analyses. Across 30 studies with 1782 individuals, the average systolic blood pressure was 109.88 mmHg (95% CI, 108-111.75; I², 92.2%), and diastolic blood pressure was 70.99 mmHg (95% CI, 68.84-73.14; I², 95.7%). In 12 studies with 339 individuals, the average mean arterial pressure was 82.01 mmHg (95% CI, 79.84-84.19; I², 93.6%). Conclusions: These findings suggest that nearly 3 in 100 healthy individuals with uncomplicated pregnancies are diagnosed with de novo essential hypertension within one year postpartum. This underscores the need to extend cardiovascular screening to all postpartum individuals for one year, regardless of medical or pregnancy history.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAJOG Global ReportsSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207