Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36007101›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2022

Urban-rural differences in hypertension prevalence in low-income and middle-income countries, 1990-2020: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Otavio T Ranzani, Anjani Kalra, Chiara Di Girolamo, Ariadna Curto, Fernanda Valerio, Jaana I Halonen, Xavier Basagaña, Cathryn Tonne

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Prevalence of Hypertension in Venezuela: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Guangdong Biobank Cohort (GDBC) study.European journal of epidemiology · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Otavio T RanzaniBarcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4677-6862
Anjani KalraBarcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2220-0129
Chiara Di GirolamoHealth and Social Care Agency, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy.
Ariadna CurtoBarcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8247-9024
Fernanda ValerioDivision of Neuropathology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5248-7314
Jaana I HalonenDepartment of Health Security, Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-1142-0388
Xavier BasagañaBarcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8457-1489
Cathryn TonneBarcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-3919-8264

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe influence of urbanicity on hypertension prevalence remains poorly understood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the difference in hypertension prevalence between urban and rural areas in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the most pronounced urbanisation is underway. METHODS AND

findingsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, from 01/01/1990 to 10/03/2022. We included population-based studies with ≥400 participants 15 years and older, selected by using a valid sampling technique, from LMICs that reported the urban-rural difference in hypertension prevalence using similar blood pressure measurements. We excluded abstracts, reviews, non-English studies, and those with exclusively self-reported hypertension prevalence. Study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed by 2 independent reviewers following a standardised protocol. Our primary outcome was the urban minus rural prevalence of hypertension. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure as ≥90 mm Hg and could include use of antihypertensive medication, self-reported diagnosis, or both. We investigated heterogeneity using study-level and socioeconomic country-level indicators. We conducted meta-analysis and meta-regression using random-effects models. This systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018091671). We included 299 surveys from 66 LMICs, including 19,770,946 participants (mean age 45.4 ± SD = 9 years, 53.0% females and 63.1% from rural areas). The pooled prevalence of hypertension was 30.5% (95% CI, 28.9, 32.0) in urban areas and 27.9% (95% CI, 26.3, 29.6) in rural areas, resulting in a pooled urban-rural difference of 2.45% (95% CI, 1.57, 3.33, I-square: 99.71%, tau-square: 0.00524, Pheterogeneity < 0.001). Hypertension prevalence increased over time and the rate of change was greater in rural compared to urban areas, resulting in a pooled urban-rural difference of 5.75% (95% CI, 4.02, 7.48) in the period 1990 to 2004 and 1.38% (95% CI, 0.40, 2.37) in the period 2005 to 2020, p < 0.001 for time period. We observed substantial heterogeneity in the urban-rural difference of hypertension, which was partially explained by urban-rural definition, probably high risk of bias in sampling, country income status, region, and socioeconomic indicators. The urban-rural difference was 5.67% (95% CI, 4.22, 7.13) in low, 2.74% (95% CI, 1.41, 4.07) in lower-middle and -1.22% (95% CI, -2.73, 0.28) in upper-middle-income countries in the period 1990 to 2020, p < 0.001 for country income. The urban-rural difference was highest for South Asia (7.50%, 95% CI, 5.73, 9.26), followed by sub-Saharan Africa (4.24%, 95% CI, 2.62, 5.86) and reversed for Europe and Central Asia (-6.04%, 95% CI, -9.06, -3.01), in the period 1990 to 2020, p < 0.001 for region. Finally, the urban-rural difference in hypertension prevalence decreased nonlinearly with improvements in Human Development Index and infant mortality rate. Limitations included lack of data available from all LMICs and variability in urban and rural definitions in the literature.

conclusionsThe prevalence of hypertension in LMICs increased between 1990 and 2020 in both urban and rural areas, but with a stronger trend in rural areas. The urban minus rural hypertension difference decreased with time, and with country-level socioeconomic development. Focused action, particularly in rural areas, is needed to tackle the burden of hypertension in LMICs.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesHypertensionBlood PressureFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceRural Population

Identifiers

PMID36007101
PMCPMC9410549

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.