↓ Skip to main content

The effect of a sit-stand workstation intervention on daily sitting, standing and physical activity: protocol for a 12 month workplace randomised control trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 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
The effect of a sit-stand workstation intervention on daily sitting, standing and physical activity: protocol for a 12 month workplace randomised control trial
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1506-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Hall, Louise Mansfield, Tess Kay, Alison K McConnell

Abstract

A lack of physical activity and excessive sitting can contribute to poor physical health and wellbeing. The high percentage of the UK adult population in employment, and the prolonged sitting associated with desk-based office-work, make these workplaces an appropriate setting for interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity. This pilot study aims to determine the effect of an office-based sit-stand workstation intervention, compared with usual desk use, on daily sitting, standing and physical activity, and to examine the factors that underlie sitting, standing and physical activity, within and outside, the workplace. A randomised control trial (RCT) comparing the effects of a sit-stand workstation only and a multi-component sit-stand workstation intervention, with usual desk-based working practice (no sit-stand workstation) will be conducted with office workers across two organisations, over a 12 month period (N = 30). The multicomponent intervention will comprise organisational, environmental and individual elements. Objective data will be collected at baseline, and after 2-weeks, 3-months, 6-months and 12-months of the intervention. Objective measures of sitting, standing, and physical activity will be made concurrently (ActivPAL3™ and ActiGraph (GT3X+)). Activity diaries, ethnographic participant observation, and interviews with participants and key organisational personnel will be used to elicit understanding of the influence of organisational culture on sitting, standing and physical activity behaviour in the workplace. This study will be the first long-term sit-stand workstation intervention study utilising an RCT design, and incorporating a comprehensive process evaluation. The study will generate an understanding of the factors that encourage and restrict successful implementation of sit-stand workstation interventions, and will help inform future occupational wellbeing policy and practice. Other strengths include the objective measurement of physical activity during both work and non-work hours. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02172599 , 22nd June 2014.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 203 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Researcher 15 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 47 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 17%
Sports and Recreations 30 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 12%
Psychology 20 10%
Engineering 12 6%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 51 25%

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 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,067,406
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,271
of 14,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,312
of 385,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#97
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,856 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 57% 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 385,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 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 60% of its contemporaries.