↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of a chair intervention in the workplace to reduce musculoskeletal symptoms. A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 4,409)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
419 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 effectiveness of a chair intervention in the workplace to reduce musculoskeletal symptoms. A systematic review
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-13-145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sjan-Mari van Niekerk, Quinette Abigail Louw, Susan Hillier

Abstract

Prolonged sitting has been associated with musculoskeletal dysfunction. For desk workers, workstation modifications frequently address the work surface and chair. Chairs which can prevent abnormal strain of the neuromuscular system may aid in preventing musculo-skeletal pain and discomfort. Anecdotally, adjustability of the seat height and the seat pan depth to match the anthropometrics of the user is the most commonly recommended intervention. Within the constraints of the current economic climate, employers demand evidence for the benefits attributed to an investment in altering workstations, however this evidence-base is currently unclear both in terms of the strength of the evidence and the nature of the chair features. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of chair interventions in reducing workplace musculoskeletal symptoms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 419 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 2 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 412 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 81 19%
Student > Master 69 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 6%
Student > Postgraduate 25 6%
Other 71 17%
Unknown 99 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 94 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 13%
Engineering 30 7%
Sports and Recreations 21 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 4%
Other 89 21%
Unknown 113 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 150. 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 26 February 2024.
All research outputs
#273,783
of 25,367,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#22
of 4,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,317
of 185,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,367,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 185,758 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 99% of its contemporaries.