Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Mar 7.
Published in final edited form as: NEJM Evid. 2023 Jul 6;2(10):EVIDoa2300058. doi: 10.1056/EVIDoa2300058

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and risk of stroke in U.S. Black women

Shanshan Sheehy 1, Hugo J Aparicio 2,3,4, Nuo Xu 1, Kimberly A Bertrand 1, Yvonne Page Robles 1, Vasileios-Arsenios Lioutas 5,6, Julie G Shulman 2, Lynn Rosenberg 1, Julie R Palmer 1,2
PMCID: PMC10919377  NIHMSID: NIHMS1970977  PMID: 38320178

Abstract

Background:

Black women have a disproportionately higher burden of both preeclamptic pregnancy and stroke compared with White women, but virtually all existing evidence on this possible association has been generated from women of European ancestry.

Methods:

In the Black Women’s Health Study (BWHS), a prospective cohort of U.S. Black women who enrolled in 1995, 42,924 participants were parous and free of cardiovascular disease at baseline. Biennial questionnaires included questions on preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, and stroke. Medical records were sought for participants who reported a stroke and were reviewed by study neurologists blinded to reproductive history. Cox proportional hazard models, with control for potential confounders, were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results:

Over a median of 22 years of follow-up, there were 1,555 incident strokes, including 310 among 4,938 women with a history of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDOP). The multivariable HR for stroke for women with any HDOP compared with those who had never experienced HDOP was 1.66 (95% CI 1.46-1.89). Comparable HRs were 1.53 (95% CI 1.29-1.82) for preeclampsia and 1.81 (95% CI 1.53-2.13) for gestational hypertension only. Associations were similar among women under age 55 and those aged 55 and older.

Conclusions:

In this prospective study of Black women, a history of HDOP was associated with an estimated 66% increased long-term risk of stroke. This association may contribute to the disproportionately higher stroke incidence in Black women, given the higher prevalence of HDOP in this population.

Keywords: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, stroke, Black women

Introduction

In the United States, 55,000 more women than men have a stroke each year1,2. Black women are particularly vulnerable and experience stroke and stroke-related mortality at higher rates3,4 and earlier onset than other racial groups5,6. Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-specific multi-system syndrome7 affecting approximately 2-8% of pregnancies8 and is the second leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide9. The prevalence of preeclampsia/eclampsia among Black women in the U.S. is 60% higher than among White women (70 per 1,000 deliveries in 2014 for Black women vs. 43 per 1,000 for White women)10,11. In recent years, rates of severe preeclampsia have been increasing for Black women12.

The American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines recently added pregnancy complications as risk factors for stroke. However, the recommendations were based largely on data from women of Northern European ancestry1315. The AHA has called for more research on risk of stroke in women, especially women from underrepresented populations. To address the knowledge gap in Black women, we examined the relation of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDOP), and preeclampsia in particular, to long-term stroke risk in a large prospective cohort of self-identified Black women, the Black Women’s Health Study (BWHS).

Methods

Study population:

The BWHS is a prospective cohort study of 59,000 Black women enrolled from across the continental United States in 199516. All but 5% of BWHS participants were born in the U.S. At baseline in 1995, participants were 21 to 69 years of age, with a median age of 38. Participants have provided information on biennial questionnaires on demographic characteristics, socioeconomic factors, medical conditions, and lifestyle factors. Follow-up has been successful for 85% of potential person-years through 11 completed biennial rounds of follow-up.

We restricted the analysis to the 44,298 women who had had at least one birth (either live birth or still birth), thereby excluding nulliparous women. Most participants were already parous at the time of BWHS enrollment in 1995, but 14% had their first birth during follow-up and they entered this analysis at the year of that first birth. We further excluded women who had a history of cardiovascular disease before entry into the analysis. The final analytic sample comprised 42,924 parous Black women (Figure 1). The Boston University Medical Campus Institutional Review Board approved the study. Study participants were informed in each questionnaire that taking part was entirely voluntary and that at any time they could choose not to participate either by not completing the questionnaire or by asking for their name to be removed from the study mailing list.

Figure 1. Flow diagram of the analytical study cohort.

Figure 1.

Figure shows exclusions and inclusions for analytical dataset and stroke outcomes

Ascertainment of HDOP: History of HDOP was defined as a self-report of gestational hypertension and/or preeclampsia/toxemia. In 1997 and 1999, all participants were asked about history of gestational hypertension (“high blood pressure during pregnancy”). In 1997 and again in 2009, participants were asked if they had ever had a pregnancy with toxemia/preeclampsia. In addition, detailed pregnancy characteristics were queried for women who had births between 1995 and 2003; women who reported having a baby born at least 3 weeks early were asked about the reason for the preterm birth, including the option “labor was induced or had c-section because blood pressure was too high (preeclampsia/toxemia)”. Those who checked that option were classified as positive for a history of preeclampsia. For analyses of specific types of HDOP, women who reported both preeclampsia and gestational hypertension were classified as having had “preeclampsia” and women who reported only gestational hypertension were classified as having had “gestational hypertension”.

Ascertainment of stroke:

Stroke cases were ascertained through biennial BWHS questionnaires, which asked participants to self-report occurrences of physician-diagnosed stroke. Fatal stroke was ascertained through linkage with the National Death Index (NDI). Validity of self-reported stroke was assessed through medical record review by an independent team of neurologists using the World Health Organization (WHO) definition:17 a new focal (or at times global) neurological impairment of sudden onset, lasting more than 24 hours (or leading to death) and of presumed vascular origin17. Events not meeting this definition but with neuroimaging evidence (by report) consistent with acute ischemia or hemorrhage were also classified as stroke events, as were strokes that had been aborted by thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy and transient ischemic attacks (TIA) with demonstration of an ischemic lesion on magnetic resonance diffusion weighted imaging. Appropriate medical records were obtained for 618 (31%) of participants who reported stroke; for the remainder, either the participants were unwilling to sign a medical records release or the hospital did not provide the appropriate records (Figure S1). Among the 618 cases for which records were available, 450 (73%) were confirmed through adjudication; the remainder were disconfirmed.

The primary analyses included all self-reported first onset strokes except those that were disconfirmed by neurologist adjudication, as well as fatal strokes identified through NDI, for a total of 1,555 incident cases in 42,924 women (Figure 1). A secondary analysis was conducted using only confirmed cases (N=576).

Covariates:

We adjusted for variables identified a priori as pre-pregnancy confounding factors: age at first birth (<20, 20–24, 25-29, 30-34, ≥35 years), education (<12, 12–15, 16, ≥17 years), body mass index (BMI) at age 18 years (weight in kg divided by height in meters squared; continuous), and parental history of stroke (yes, no). We assigned “No” to those women who did not check “yes” to parental history of stroke. BMI at age 18 years was used as a proxy for pre-pregnancy BMI because questionnaires had not specifically asked about BMI before the first pregnancy and 87% percent of first pregnancies in the BWHS occurred after age 18. Adult height was assessed in the baseline questionnaire and weight was assessed in every questionnaire cycle. Self-reported weight and height were validated among 115 BWHS participants, with Spearman correlations for weight and height being 0.93 and 0.97, respectively, for self-report versus technician measures18.

Participants were classified as having a history of hypertension at baseline if they reported physician-diagnosed hypertension together with use of an antihypertensive medications (beta-blocker, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, angiotensin receptors blocker, renin inhibitor) or diuretic, or reported use of an antihypertensive medication alone. In a prior validation study, 138 out of 139 (99%) self-reports of hypertension were confirmed by medical records19. Participants were classified as having a history of type 2 diabetes if they reported physician-diagnosed diabetes with onset at age 30 or older at baseline. In a validation study, 217 (94%) of 229 women who reported diabetes were confirmed by their physicians to have type 2 diabetes20.

Statistical analyses:

Eligible women contributed person-years from enrollment in 1995 (or year of first birth if their first birth occurred after enrollment) until diagnosis of incident stroke, last questionnaire completed, death, or the end of follow up in December 2019, whichever came first. For women who were already parous by the time they enrolled in 1995, follow-up began when they enrolled in 1995, and exposure status was updated over time if later pregnancies occurred. For women who were nulliparous in 1995 but had a pregnancy after that time, follow-up began at the time of the onset of their first pregnancy and exposure status was updated over time if they had additional pregnancies. Analyses were censored on the occurrence of the birth of twins or triplets because such pregnancies are associated with increased risk of HDOP and also associated with higher cardiovascular disease risk, but not necessarily through the relation with HDOP. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for stroke risk in women with a history of preeclampsia or gestational hypertension relative to risk in women who had normotensive pregnancies only. In addition to the primary analysis, which included all cases, we conducted a secondary analysis restricted to confirmed cases only. We conducted a sensitivity analysis restricted to women who had only one term pregnancy in order to remove any potential confounding by number of births or birth order of the preeclamptic pregnancy, for which data were not available.

In multivariable models, we additionally adjusted for BMI at age 18 (continuous, kg/m2), age at first birth (<20, 20-24, 25-29, 30+ years), educational attainment (<12, 12-15, 16, ≥17 years), and parental history of stroke (yes, no). It would have been ideal to adjust for potential confounding by cardiometabolic status at the time of pregnancy, but that was not possible because most participants had already completed childbearing by the time of enrollment in 1995. Only 14% of parous women gave birth for the first time after enrollment in the study.

We conducted analyses stratified on age (<55, ≥55 years), BMI (<25, 25-29, ≥30 kg/m2), hypertension, and residence in the Stroke Belt (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia21). We tested effect modification by creating interaction terms between HDOP and the stratified terms, and tested interaction using the Wald test. For missing data in covariates, the missing indicator method was used. Sensitivity analyses were carried out using the complete case method.

We calculated the population attributable risk fraction (PAF) and its 95% confidence interval using the formula PAF=Ppop×(RR1)Ppop×(RR1)+1 (Ppop= the proportion of women with HDOP in the entire study population; RR=the multivariable hazard ratio for ever HDOP pregnancy relative to only normotensive pregnancies).

Results

Women who had had HDOP were similar to parous women whose pregnancies were normotensive with regard to age at first birth, parity, education, parental history of stroke, geographic region, and smoking status (Table 1). At the time of enrollment in 1995, 19% of women with HDOP had BMI at age 18 ≥ 25 kg/m2, compared with 11% for normotensive women; 33% of women with HDOP had hypertension, compared with 15% for normotensive women.

Table 1.

Age-standardized baseline characteristics of parous Black Women’s Health Study (BWHS) participants by history of hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (HDOP)

Characteristics No history of hypertensive disorder of pregnancy
(n=37,986)
History of hypertensive disorder of pregnancy
(n=4,938)
Standardized difference
Age at enrollment in 1995, mean (SD) 40.25 (10.88) 38.47 (10.14) −0.168
Age at first birth, years (%)* 0.123
  < 20 30 28
  20 - 24 31 32
  25 - 29 20 22
  30 - 34 11 11
  ≥ 35 5 6
Body mass index (BMI) at age 18, kg/m2 (%)* 0.265
  < 20 43 34
  20 - 24 44 46
  ≥ 25 11 19
Education, years (%)* 0.065
  < 12 3 3
  12 – 15 56 57
  16 21 20
  ≥ 17 20 20
Number of births (%) 0.085
 1 43 39
 2 31 31
  ≥ 3 26 30
Parental history of stroke (%) 17 20 0.059
Geographic region (%)
  Northeast 26 24 0.156
  South 30 32
  Midwest 24 24
  West 19 19
Stroke belt †† 25 28 0.067
Hypertension (%) 15 33 0.366

Baseline was year of enrollment in 1995 for 86% of participants and year of first birth for the 14% of participants who gave birth for the first time after enrollment

*

Proportion of participants with missing data: age at first birth, 1.4%; BMI at age 18, 1.8%; years of education, 0.2%.

††

Stroke belt was defined as Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia

In the primary analyses, the age-adjusted HR for HDOP versus no HDOP was 1.72 (95% CI 1.52-1.95, Table 2); after additional control for age at first birth, BMI at age 18, educational attainment, and parental history of stroke, the HR was 1.66 (95% CI 1.46-1.89). The comparable multivariable HRs were 1.53 (95% CI 1.29-1.82) for preeclampsia and 1.81 (95% CI 1.53-2.13) for gestational hypertension without preeclampsia (Table 2). Twelve of the strokes (<0.01%) had occurred within one year of pregnancy; results were unchanged with exclusion of those women.

Table 2.

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in relation to incidence of stroke in the Black Women’s Health Study, 1995-2019

Hypertensive disorder of pregnancy Stroke cases / person-years Incidence rate Age-adjusted HR (95% CI) Multivariable* HR (95% CI)
No 1,245/692,670 1.80 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference)
Yes 310/109,495 2.83 1.72 (1.52, 1.95) 1.66 (1.46, 1.89)
 Preeclampsia 148/60,012 2.47 1.56 (1.31, 1.85) 1.53 (1.29, 1.82)
 Gestational hypertension only 162/49,483 3.27 1.90 (1.61, 2.24) 1.81 (1.53, 2.13)
*

Adjusted for age, age at first birth, body mass index at age 18, educational attainment, and parental history of stroke

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. Incidence rate: per 1000 person-years.

In a secondary analysis restricted to 576 confirmed strokes (Table 3), the multivariable HR for any HDOP relative to none was 1.73 (95% CI 1.41-2.13) and the comparable HRs for preeclampsia and gestational hypertension were 1.63 (95% CI 1.23-2.16) and 1.85 (95% CI 1.41-2.43) respectively.

Table 3.

Association of hypertensive disorder of pregnancy with incidence of stroke in the Black Women’s Health Study, 1995-2019, confirmed cases only

Hypertensive disorder of pregnancy Stroke cases / person-years Incidence rate Age-adjusted HR (95% CI) Multivariable* HR (95% CI)
No 460/705,263 0.65 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference)
Yes 116/112,803 1.03 1.78 (1.45, 2.18) 1.73 (1.41, 2.13)
 Preeclampsia 56/61,378 0.91 1.67 (1.26, 2.21) 1.63 (1.23, 2.16)
 Gestational hypertension only 60/51,425 1.17 1.89 (1.44, 2.48) 1.85 (1.41, 2.43)
*

Adjusted for age, age at first birth, body mass index at age 18, educational attainment, and parental history of stroke

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. Incidence rate: per 1000 person-years.

There were 393 incident stroke cases among uniparous women (Table 4) and the HR for stroke risk for any HDOP versus no HDOP was 1.80 (95% CI 1.39-2.34). The comparable HRs for preeclampsia and gestational hypertension were 1.83 (95% CI 1.29-2.58) and 1.77 (95% CI 1.24-2.53).

Table 4.

Association of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy with stroke incidence among participants who had only one birth

Hypertensive disorder of pregnancy Stroke cases / person-years Incidence rate Age-adjusted HR (95% CI) Multivariable* HR (95% CI)
No 320/247,939 1.29 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference)
Yes 73/33,464 2.18 1.90 (1.47, 2.46) 1.80 (1.39, 2.34)
 Preeclampsia 38/18,721 2.03 1.88 (1.34, 2.64) 1.83 (1.29, 2.58)
 Gestational hypertension only 35/14,743 2.37 1.92 (1.35, 2.73) 1.77 (1.24, 2.53)
*

Adjusted for age, age at first birth, body mass index at age 18, educational attainment, and parental history of stroke

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. Incidence rate: per 1000 person-years.

In age-stratified analyses, HRs for HDOP and stroke risk were 1.88 (95% CI 1.55-2.26, Table S1) among women under 55 and 1.52 (95% CI 1.28-1.80) among women age 55 and older. Associations were consistent across strata of BMI (Table S2) and residence in the Stroke Belt (Table S3). In analyses stratified by hypertension in 1995 (Table S4), an association of HDOP with increased stroke risk was present both among women with hypertension and those without. Our results and conclusions remained the same after sensitivity analyses using the complete case method for missing data in covariates.

We estimated that 7% (95% CI 5%−9%) of stroke cases in this population were attributable to HDOP. Population attributable fractions were 6% (95% CI 3%−9%) for preeclampsia, and 9% (95% CI 6%−12%) for gestational hypertension.

Discussion

In this prospective cohort study of 42,924 Black women, women who reported a history of HDOP were estimated to have 1.66 times the risk of stroke relative to parous women who had not had those pregnancy complications; for history of preeclampsia in particular, the estimated HR was 1.53. The association was present across strata of age, BMI, and residence in the Stroke Belt. Approximately 7% of stroke cases were estimated to be attributable to HDOP.

Pregnancy is a unique time period for women, and the risk of stroke is elevated during the third trimester and postpartum period due to cardiometabolic physiological changes22,23. Preeclampsia triggers a cascade of downstream vascular, endothelial, and coagulation dysfunction events that may lead to long-term increased stroke risk24. In studies based primarily on White women2532, preeclampsia has been estimated to be associated with 1.5 to 2 times the risk of all cardiovascular disease and of stroke specifically. In a single study of Black women (42 incident strokes) HDOP was associated with 1.7 times the risk of stroke within 5 years of the delivery33. Although previous findings from studies of White women may well be generalizable to Black women, this has not been demonstrated until now. In our study of 42,924 parous Black women with a median of 22 years of follow up, we found a 1.7-fold increased stroke risk associated with HDOP, 1.5-fold increased stroke risk for preeclampsia and 1.8-fold increased stroke risk for gestational hypertension. The slightly stronger association for gestational hypertension than for preeclampsia in our study is consistent with findings from prior studies in White women32,34. We speculate that HDOP subtypes may be more complicated than representing simply a spectrum of severity and may represent different disease phenotypes.

Strengths of the study include the large sample size of Black women, large number of incident strokes, with stroke outcomes adjudicated by neurologist review of medical records. Other strengths include the prospective cohort study design, length of follow up, as well as the ability to examine associations across different subgroups such as geographic regions (including within the Stroke Belt).

The study has limitations. It was not possible to obtain medical records for all participants who reported stroke, either because individuals would not sign a medical record release or because appropriate records could not be obtained from the hospitals. While it was possible to confirm stroke events for participants who self-reported stroke, there may have been women had stroke events but did not report them and would have been incorrectly classified as non-cases. We think that such misclassification would have been nondifferential with regard to HDOP, and, regardless, would have had very little effect, if any, on analysis results because there were over 37,000 non-cases, among whom only a very few would represent true stroke cases. Hazard ratios were very similar in analyses from the overall sample of self-reported cases (N= 1,555) and the sample of confirmed cases (N= 576), with HRs of 1.66 (1.46, 1.89) and 1.73 (1.41, 2.13), respectively. Preeclampsia and gestational hypertension were self-reported, allowing the possibility of exposure misclassification and underreporting of exposure. The literature suggests modest accuracy of self-reported, preeclampsia3539 , history of gestational hypertension40, birth41 , and pregnancy characteristics4244. 45. It was not possible to obtain pregnancy medical records for all BWHS participants to validate self-reports. However, misclassification of exposure due to underreporting of these conditions would have biased results in the direction of no association rather than towards a positive association. It is possible that some women who reported gestational hypertension may actually have had undiagnosed chronic hypertension; such misclassification may have led to inflated estimates of the relative risk. However, given the young age at first pregnancy in this cohort (22 years), the number of women affected may be minimal. In the BWHS, we do not have detailed data on each pregnancy. However, in our sensitivity analyses restricting to women with only one birth, the magnitude of association was similar to that in the larger group of women studied. A limitation of the study is lack of data on the exact timing of each pregnancy and the pregnancy in which preeclampsia occurred. Therefore, it was not possible to do a time-varying analysis for pregnancies that occurred before entry into the study. Instead we began follow-up in 1995 (year of enrollment for all participants) for all women who had had at least one pregnancy before enrolling in the study and at the time of the first pregnancy for women whose first birth occurred after enrollment. Because women who experienced a stroke before enrollment in the study were excluded from the analyses, there may have been some “depletion of susceptibles”. If this occurred, it would lead to underestimation of the true association between HDOP and stroke risk.

Women who developed HDOP may already have had a worse underlying cardiometabolic risk profile before pregnancy. Despite our efforts to control for most potential confounders, we did not have detailed information on pre-pregnancy cardiometabolic factors for most of the women, and therefore were not able to adjust for these factors.

Black women are disproportionately affected by both stroke and pregnancy complications. Our study provides evidence that pregnancy history may be an important factor for risk assessment and prevention of long-term stroke. Cardiovascular screening recommendations for Black women in particular should take history of HDOP into account.

Conclusion

In this large prospective study of Black women, a vulnerable population with a high prevalence of preeclampsia and at high risk for stroke relative to other U.S. racial groups, women who had had a preeclamptic pregnancy were estimated to have a 66% increased risk of developing stroke many years later. Our results may explain, in part, the disproportionately high incidence of stroke in Black women relative to other populations.

Supplementary Material

Suppl

Source of Funding and support:

This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, R01CA058420, U01CA164974, and R01MD015085. Dr. Aparicio is supported by an American Academy of Neurology Career Development Award and from the Boston University Aram V. Chobanian Assistant Professorship.

Conflict of Interest:

The authors have no conflict of interests. The sole role of the funders was to support data collection. The funders had no role in design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

References

  • 1.Bushnell C, McCullough LD, Awad IA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in women: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2014;45:1545–88. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Mosca L, Benjamin EJ, Berra K, et al. Effectiveness-based guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women--2011 update: a guideline from the american heart association. Circulation 2011;123:1243–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Carnethon MR, Pu J, Howard G, et al. Cardiovascular Health in African Americans: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2017;136:e393–e423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Tsao CW, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2022;145:e153–e639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Koton S, Schneider AL, Rosamond WD, et al. Stroke incidence and mortality trends in US communities, 1987 to 2011. JAMA 2014;312:259–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Howard VJ, Kleindorfer DO, Judd SE, et al. Disparities in stroke incidence contributing to disparities in stroke mortality. Ann Neurol 2011;69:619–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Maric-Bilkan C, Abrahams Vikki M, Arteaga SS, et al. Research Recommendations From the National Institutes of Health Workshop on Predicting, Preventing, and Treating Preeclampsia. Hypertension 2019;73:757–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Duley L The global impact of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Seminars in perinatology 2009;33:130–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Henderson JT, Whitlock EP, O’Conner E, Senger CA, Thompson JH, Rowland MG. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews. Low-Dose Aspirin for the Prevention of Morbidity and Mortality From Preeclampsia: A Systematic Evidence Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Breathett K, Muhlestein D, Foraker R, Gulati M. Differences in preeclampsia rates between African American and Caucasian women: trends from the National Hospital Discharge Survey. Journal of women’s health 2014;23:886–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Fingar KR, Mabry-Hernandez I, Ngo-Metzger Q, Wolff T, Steiner CA, Elixhauser A. Delivery Hospitalizations Involving Preeclampsia and Eclampsia, 2005-2014. HCUP Statistical Brief #222. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2017. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ananth CV, Keyes KM, Wapner RJ. Pre-eclampsia rates in the United States, 1980-2010: age-period-cohort analysis. BMJ 2013;347:f6564. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Leffert LR, Clancy CR, Bateman BT, Bryant AS, Kuklina EV. Hypertensive disorders and pregnancy-related stroke: frequency, trends, risk factors, and outcomes. Obstetrics and gynecology 2015;125:124–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Poorthuis MH, Algra AM, Algra A, Kappelle LJ, Klijn CJ. Female- and Male-Specific Risk Factors for Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Neurol 2017;74:75–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lo CCW, Lo ACQ, Leow SH, et al. Future Cardiovascular Disease Risk for Women With Gestational Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of the American Heart Association 2020;9:e013991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Rosenberg L, Adams-Campbell L, Palmer JR. The Black Women’s Health Study: a follow-up study for causes and preventions of illness. Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association 1995;50:56–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Walker AE, Robins M, Weinfeld FD. The National Survey of Stroke. Clinical findings. Stroke 1981;12:I13–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Carter-Nolan PL, Adams-Campbell LL, Makambi K, Lewis S, Palmer JR, Rosenberg L. Validation of physical activity instruments: Black Women’s Health Study. Ethn Dis 2006;16:943–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA 2003;289:2560–72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Palmer JR, Boggs DA, Krishnan S, Hu FB, Singer M, Rosenberg L. Sugar-sweetened beverages and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in African American women. Archives of internal medicine 2008;168:1487–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.National Heart L, and Blood Institute. Stroke Belt Initiative. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) 1996. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/files/docs/resources/heart/sb_spec.pdf last accessed 01/30/2023.
  • 22.Bateman BT, Schumacher HC, Bushnell CD, et al. Intracerebral hemorrhage in pregnancy: frequency, risk factors, and outcome. Neurology 2006;67:424–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Scott CA, Bewley S, Rudd A, et al. Incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of stroke in pregnancy. Obstetrics and gynecology 2012;120:318–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Perry H, Khalil A, Thilaganathan B. Preeclampsia and the cardiovascular system: An update. Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine 2018;28:505–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Brouwers L, van der Meiden-van Roest AJ, Savelkoul C, et al. Recurrence of pre-eclampsia and the risk of future hypertension and cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2018;125:1642–54. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Wu P, Haththotuwa R, Kwok CS, et al. Preeclampsia and Future Cardiovascular Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes 2017;10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Grandi SM, Filion KB, Yoon S, et al. Cardiovascular Disease-Related Morbidity and Mortality in Women With a History of Pregnancy Complications. Circulation 2019;139:1069–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Brown MC, Best KE, Pearce MS, Waugh J, Robson SC, Bell R. Cardiovascular disease risk in women with pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. European journal of epidemiology 2013;28:1–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hovsepian DA, Sriram N, Kamel H, Fink ME, Navi BB. Acute cerebrovascular disease occurring after hospital discharge for labor and delivery. Stroke 2014;45:1947–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Mongraw-Chaffin ML, Cirillo PM, Cohn BA. Preeclampsia and cardiovascular disease death: prospective evidence from the child health and development studies cohort. Hypertension 2010;56:166–71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Savitz DA, Danilack VA, Elston B, Lipkind HS. Pregnancy-induced hypertension and diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke, and diabetes hospitalization in the year following delivery. American journal of epidemiology 2014;180:41–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Stuart JJ, Tanz LJ, Rimm EB, et al. Cardiovascular Risk Factors Mediate the Long-Term Maternal Risk Associated With Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;79:1901–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Malek AM, Wilson DA, Turan TN, Mateus J, Lackland DT, Hunt KJ. Maternal Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, and Mortality Within 1, 3, and 5 Years of Delivery Among Women With Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy and Pre-Pregnancy Hypertension. Journal of the American Heart Association 2021;10:e018155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Männistö T, Mendola P, Vääräsmäki M, et al. Elevated blood pressure in pregnancy and subsequent chronic disease risk. Circulation 2013;127:681–90. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Krakowiak P, Walker CK, Tancredi DJ, Hertz-Picciotto I. Maternal Recall Versus Medical Records of Metabolic Conditions from the Prenatal Period: A Validation Study. Maternal and child health journal 2015;19:1925–35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Coolman M, de Groot CJ, Jaddoe VW, Hofman A, Raat H, Steegers EA. Medical record validation of maternally reported history of preeclampsia. Journal of clinical epidemiology 2010;63:932–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ellison GT, de Wet T, Matshidze KP, Cooper P. The reliability and validity of self-reported reproductive history and obstetric morbidity amongst Birth to Ten mothers in Soweto. Curationis 2000;23:76–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Falkegard M, Schirmer H, Lochen ML, Oian P, Acharya G. The validity of self-reported information about hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in a population-based survey: the Tromso Study. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2015;94:28–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Diehl CL, Brost BC, Hogan MC, et al. Preeclampsia as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease later in life: validation of a preeclampsia questionnaire. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2008;198:e11–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Moth FN, Sebastian TR, Horn J, Rich-Edwards J, Romundstad PR, Asvold BO. Validity of a selection of pregnancy complications in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2016;95:519–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Delgado-Rodriguez M, Gomez-Olmedo M, Bueno-Cavanillas A, Garcia-Martin M, Galvez-Vargas R. Recall bias in a case-control study of low birth weight. Journal of clinical epidemiology 1995;48:1133–40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Gresham E, Forder P, Chojenta CL, Byles JE, Loxton DJ, Hure AJ. Agreement between self-reported perinatal outcomes and administrative data in New South Wales, Australia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015;15:161-. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Skulstad SM, Igland J, Johannessen A, et al. Validation of maternal reported pregnancy and birth characteristics against the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. PLoS One 2017;12:e0181794–e. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Little RE. Birthweight and gestational age: mothers’ estimates compared with state and hospital records. American journal of public health 1986;76:1350–1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Carter EB, Stuart JJ, Farland LV, et al. Pregnancy Complications as Markers for Subsequent Maternal Cardiovascular Disease: Validation of a Maternal Recall Questionnaire. Journal of women’s health 2015;24:702–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Suppl

RESOURCES