ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Factors associated with lost to follow-up (LTFU) among patients with hypertension: A scoping review.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regular follow-up appointments are essential for effective hypertension management; however, many patients fail to attend scheduled visits and become lost to follow-up (LTFU). Understanding the factors associated with LTFU is important for preventing hypertension-related complications such as stroke, cardiovascular disease, and kidney disorders. This scoping review aimed to identify factors associated with LTFU among patients with hypertension and to summarize the terminology and timeframes used to define LTFU in the literature. A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A systematic search was performed for studies published between 2010 and 2025 across MEDLINE, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and grey literature sources. The review protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF) (Registration: https://osf.io/a2wsg/). The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using design-specific tools. A total of 4,039 records were identified, and after removing duplicates, 2,956 articles were screened. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including six cross-sectional studies, four mixed-methods studies, one qualitative study, one retrospective case-control study, and one cohort study. Nine studies were rated as high quality and four as moderate quality. The definitions and terminology used to characterize LTFU varied considerably across studies. Factors associated with LTFU were grouped into five categories: patient-related, treatment and disease-related, healthcare provider-related, health service and system-related, and interpersonal factors. Patient-related factors were most frequently reported, followed by treatment and disease characteristics, while healthcare provider, service, and system-related factors were less commonly described. Interpersonal factors were reported in only three studies. This scoping review identified a range of patient-, treatment-, healthcare provider-, and health system-related factors contributing to LTFU among patients with hypertension. The findings highlight the complexity of LTFU in hypertension care and underscore the need for targeted strategies to strengthen follow-up mechanisms, improve patient engagement, and enhance continuity of care.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.