↓ Skip to main content

Differences between work and leisure in temporal patterns of objectively measured physical activity among blue-collar workers

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
Differences between work and leisure in temporal patterns of objectively measured physical activity among blue-collar workers
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2339-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

David M. Hallman, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Nidhi Gupta, Mette Korshøj, Andreas Holtermann

Abstract

Leisure time physical activity (LTPA) is generally associated with favorable cardiovascular health outcomes, while occupational physical activity (OPA) shows less clear, or even opposite, cardiovascular effects. This apparent paradox is not sufficiently understood, but differences in temporal patterns of OPA and LTPA have been suggested as one explanation. Our aim was to investigate the extent to which work and leisure (non-occupational time) differ in temporal activity patterns among blue-collar workers, and to assess the modification of these patterns by age and gender. This study was conducted on a cross-sectional sample of male (n = 108) and female (n = 83) blue-collar workers, aged between 21 and 65 years. Physical activity and sedentary behavior were assessed using accelerometers (Actigraph GT3X+) worn on the thigh and trunk for four consecutive days. Temporal patterns of OPA and LTPA were retrieved using Exposure Variation Analysis (EVA), and expressed in terms of percentage of work and leisure time spent in uninterrupted periods of different durations (<1 min, 1-5 min, 5-10 min, 10-30 min, 30-60 min and > 60 min) of sitting, standing, and walking. Repeated measures ANOVA and linear regression analyses were used to test a) possible differences between OPA and LTPA in selected EVA derivatives, and b) the modification of these differences by age and gender. OPA showed a larger percentage time walking in brief (<5 min) periods [mean (SD): 33.4 % (12.2)], and less time in prolonged (>30 min) sitting [7.0 % (9.3)] than LTPA [walking 15.4 % (5.0); sitting 31.9 % (15.3)], even after adjustment for the difference between work and leisure in total time spent in each activity type. These marked differences in the temporal pattern of OPA and LTPA were modified by gender, but not age. We found that the temporal patterns of OPA and LTPA among blue-collar workers were markedly different even after adjustment for total physical activity time, and that this difference was modified by gender. We recommend using EVA derivatives in future studies striving to disentangle the apparent paradoxical cardiovascular effect of physical activity at work and during leisure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 118 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 17%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 35 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 17%
Sports and Recreations 12 10%
Engineering 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 38 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,430,119
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,862
of 14,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,364
of 274,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#233
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 274,278 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.