↓ Skip to main content

Time kinetics of physical activity, sitting, and quality of life measures within a regional workplace: a cross–sectional analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
142 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Time kinetics of physical activity, sitting, and quality of life measures within a regional workplace: a cross–sectional analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3487-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel B. Lindsay, Sue Devine, Rebecca M. Sealey, Anthony S. Leicht

Abstract

Interventions to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviours within the workplace have been previously investigated. However, the evolution of these constructs without intervention has not been well documented. This retrospective study explored the natural progression or time kinetics of physical activity, sedentary behaviours and quality of life in a professional skilled workplace where focussed interventions were lacking. Participants (n = 346) employed as full-time staff members at a regional university completed an online survey in 2013 assessing physical activity and sedentary behaviours via the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, and quality of life via the Short-Form 36v2 questionnaire. Differences between that cohort of participants and an initial sample of similar participants (2009, n = 297), accounting for gender and staff categories (academic vs. professional), were examined using ANCOVAs with working hours as a co-variate. In comparison to the initial cohort, the follow-up cohort reported significantly less leisure-time, total walking, total vigorous and total physical activity levels, and lower overall physical health for quality of life (p < 0.05). In contrast, the follow-up cohort reported a significantly greater weekly sitting time, greater mental health scores for quality of life and greater total moderate physical activity levels (p < 0.05) compared to the initial cohort. Over a 4-year timeframe and without focussed workplace interventions, total physical activity levels were lower with sedentary behaviours greater at a rate twice that reported previously. Continuation of these undesirable health behaviours may impact negatively on worker productivity and health at a greater rate than that currently reported. Workplace interventions targeting sedentary behaviours and physical activity should be actively incorporated into organisations to counteract the alarming behavioural trends found in this study to maintain and/or enhance employee health and productivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 142 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 14%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 45 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 13%
Sports and Recreations 12 8%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Psychology 10 7%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 48 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,307,401
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,619
of 14,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,071
of 344,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#179
of 394 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 394 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.