↓ Skip to main content

Impact of a workplace ‘sit less, move more’ program on efficiency-related outcomes of office employees

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
twitter
11 X users
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 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
Impact of a workplace ‘sit less, move more’ program on efficiency-related outcomes of office employees
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4367-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Puig-Ribera, Judit Bort-Roig, Maria Giné-Garriga, Angel M. González-Suárez, Iván Martínez-Lemos, Jesús Fortuño, Joan C. Martori, Laura Muñoz-Ortiz, Raimon Milà, Nicholas D. Gilson, Jim McKenna

Abstract

Few studies have examined the impact of 'sit less, move more' interventions on workplace performance. This study assessed the short and mid-term impacts of and patterns of change within, a 19-week workplace web-based intervention (Walk@WorkSpain; W@WS; 2010-11) on employees´ presenteeism, mental well-being and lost work performance. A site randomised control trial recruited employees at six Spanish university campuses (n = 264; 42 ± 10 years; 171 female), assigned by worksite and campus to an Intervention (IG; used W@WS; n = 129; 87 female) or an active Comparison group (A-CG; pedometer, paper diary and self-reported sitting time; n = 135; 84 female). A linear mixed model assessed changes between the baseline, ramping (8 weeks), maintenance (11 weeks) and follow-up (two months) phases for the IG versus A-CG on (i) % of lost work productivity (Work Limitations Questionnaire; WLQ); (ii) three scales for presenteeism (WLQ) assessing difficulty meeting scheduling demands (Time), performing cognitive and inter-personal tasks (Mental-Interpersonal) and decrements in meeting the quantity, quality and timeliness of completed work (Output); and (iii) mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale). T-tests assessed differences between groups for changes on the main outcomes. In the IG, a multivariate logistic regression model identified patterns of response according to baseline socio-demographic variables, physical activity and sitting time. There was a significant 2 (group) × 2 (program time points) interaction for the Time (F [3]=8.69, p = 0.005), Mental-Interpersonal (F [3]=10.01, p = 0.0185), Output scales for presenteeism (F [3]=8.56, p = 0.0357), and for % of lost work performance (F [3]=10.31, p = 0.0161). Presenteeism and lost performance rose significantly in both groups across all study time points; after baseline performance was consistently better in the IG than in the A-CG. Better performance was linked to employees being more active (Time, p = 0.041) and younger (Mental-interpersonal, p = 0.057; Output, p = 0.017). Higher total sitting time during nonworking days (Mental-interpersonal, p = 0.019) and lower sitting time during workdays (WLQ Index, p = 0.013) also improved performance. Versus an active comparison condition, a 'sit less, move more` workplace intervention effectively reduced an array of markers of lost workday productivity. NCT02960750 ; Date of registration: 07/11/2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 243 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 16%
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 66 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 10%
Psychology 24 10%
Sports and Recreations 22 9%
Social Sciences 14 6%
Other 45 19%
Unknown 79 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 195. 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 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#202,455
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#187
of 17,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,250
of 325,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#8
of 257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 325,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.