“…Reasons for exclusion from metaanalyses included; findings were only presented as correlation coefficients (n=16) (35, 54-56, 61, 68, 77, 78, 81, 82, 84, 86, 87, 90, 92, 96) or as standardised regression coefficients (n=4) (57,64,89,94) , the exposure variable was presented as sodium density (n=2) (12,72) or 24-hr urinary sodium excretion was reported as sodium concentration (mmol/L) (74) or on a logarithmic scale (52,58) . Of the studies included in meta-analyses, 14 were from Asia (62,63,66,69,70,73,75,76,83,85,91,97,100,101) , eight from USA (10,11,59,60,71,88,102,103) , five from South and Central America (53,65,79,80,93) , four from Europe (9,67,95,99) , one from Samoa (98) and one included data collected across four countries (e.g. Japan, USA, UK, China) (104) .…”