↓ Skip to main content

Theory-driven, web-based, computer-tailored advice to reduce and interrupt sitting at work: development, feasibility and acceptability testing among employees

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Theory-driven, web-based, computer-tailored advice to reduce and interrupt sitting at work: development, feasibility and acceptability testing among employees
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2288-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katrien De Cocker, Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij, Greet Cardon, Corneel Vandelanotte

Abstract

Because of the adverse health effects in adults, interventions to influence workplace sitting, a large contributor to overall daily sedentary time, are needed. Computer-tailored interventions have demonstrated good outcomes in other health behaviours, though few have targeted sitting time at work. Therefore, the present aims were to (1) describe the development of a theory-driven, web-based, computer-tailored advice to influence sitting at work, (2) report on the feasibility of reaching employees, and (3) report on the acceptability of the advice. Employees from a public city service (n = 179) were invited by e-mail to participate. Employees interested to request the advice (n = 112) were sent the website link, a personal login and password. The online advice was based on different aspects of the Theory of Planned Behaviour, Self-Determination Theory and Self-Regulation Theory. Logistic regressions were conducted to compare characteristics (gender, age, education, employment status, amount of sitting and psychosocial correlates of workplace sitting) of employees requesting the advice (n = 90, 80.4 %) with those who did not. Two weeks after visiting the website, 47 employees (52.2 %) completed an online acceptability questionnaire. Those with a high education were more likely to request the advice than those with a low education (OR = 2.4, CI = 1.0-5.8), and those with a part-time job were more likely to request the advice compared to full-time employees (OR = 2.9, CI = 1.2-7.1). The majority found the advice interesting (n = 36/47, 76.6 %), relevant (n = 33/47, 70.2 %) and motivating (n = 29/47, 61.7 %). Fewer employees believed the advice was practicable (n = 15/47, 31.9 %). After completing the advice, 58.0 % (n = 25/43) reported to have started interrupting their sitting and 32.6 % (n = 17/43) additionally intended to do so; 14.0 % (n = 6/43) reported to have reduced their sitting and another 51.2 % (n = 22/43) intended to do so. More efforts are needed to reach lower educated and full-time workers. Further research should examinethe effects of this intervention in a rigorous randomised controlled trial. It is feasible to reach employees with this tool. Most of the employees who requested the advice found itacceptable and reported they changed their behaviour or intended to change it. Interrupting sittingappeared more achievable than reducing workplace sitting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 137 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Researcher 6 4%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 42 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Psychology 15 11%
Social Sciences 13 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 8%
Computer Science 10 7%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 46 33%
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 19 April 2016.
All research outputs
#5,948,434
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,883
of 15,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,084
of 275,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#101
of 276 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 275,989 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 276 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 63% of its contemporaries.