↓ Skip to main content

Acceptability and feasibility of a low-cost, theory-based and co-produced intervention to reduce workplace sitting time in desk-based university employees

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 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
Acceptability and feasibility of a low-cost, theory-based and co-produced intervention to reduce workplace sitting time in desk-based university employees
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2635-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly Mackenzie, Elizabeth Goyder, Francis Eves

Abstract

Prolonged sedentary time is linked with poor health, independent of physical activity levels. Workplace sitting significantly contributes to sedentary time, but there is limited research evaluating low-cost interventions targeting reductions in workplace sitting. Current evidence supports the use of multi-modal interventions developed using participative approaches. This study aimed to explore the acceptability and feasibility of a low-cost, co-produced, multi-modal intervention to reduce workplace sitting. The intervention was developed with eleven volunteers from a large university department in the UK using participative approaches and "brainstorming" techniques. Main components of the intervention included: emails suggesting ways to "sit less" e.g. walking and standing meetings; free reminder software to install onto computers; social media to increase awareness; workplace champions; management support; and point-of-decision prompts e.g. by lifts encouraging stair use. All staff (n = 317) were invited to take part. Seventeen participated in all aspects of the evaluation, completing pre- and post-intervention sitting logs and questionnaires. The intervention was delivered over four weeks from 7th July to 3rd August 2014. Pre- and post-intervention difference in daily workplace sitting time was presented as a mean ± standard deviation. Questionnaires were used to establish awareness of the intervention and its various elements, and to collect qualitative data regarding intervention acceptability and feasibility. Mean baseline sitting time of 440 min/workday was reported with a mean reduction of 26 ± 54 min/workday post-intervention (n = 17, 95 % CI = -2 to 53). All participants were aware of the intervention as a whole, although there was a range of awareness for individual elements of the intervention. The intervention was generally felt to be both acceptable and feasible. Management support was perceived to be a strength, whilst specific strategies that were encouraged, including walking and standing meetings, received mixed feedback. This small-scale pilot provides encouragement for the acceptability and feasibility of low-cost, multi-modal interventions to reduce workplace sitting in UK settings. Evaluation of this intervention provides useful information to support participatory approaches during intervention development and the potential for more sustainable low-cost interventions. Findings may be limited in terms of generalisability as this pilot was carried out within a health-related academic setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 217 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Unspecified 15 7%
Researcher 14 6%
Other 50 23%
Unknown 56 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 12%
Psychology 24 11%
Sports and Recreations 22 10%
Unspecified 15 7%
Other 41 19%
Unknown 64 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 20 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,891,149
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,094
of 14,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,699
of 390,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#26
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,878 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 done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 390,631 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.