Trial reportBMC public health2017
Reducing sedentary time in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes: process evaluation of the STAND (Sedentary Time ANd Diabetes) RCT.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of process evaluations of interventions in trials investigating sedentary behaviour in adults.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Pooled it
- Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- Effectiveness of the Stand More AT (SMArT) Work intervention: cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Trial
- The feasibility and acceptability of delivering and evaluating a physical activity intervention (ACCEPTANCE) for cervical cancer survivors.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- Impact of yoga on the central and peripheral vascular function among desk-based workers: A single-centered trial study.F1000Research · 2024Article
- A-REST (Activity to Reduce Excessive Sitting Time): A Feasibility Trial to Reduce Prolonged Sitting in Police Staff.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Exploring adults' experiences of sedentary behaviour and participation in non-workplace interventions designed to reduce sedentary behaviour: a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.BMC public health · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReducing sedentary behaviour may have important health implications. This study evaluated the potential enablers and barriers for outcomes of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate a pragmatic education based intervention designed to reduce sedentary (sitting) behaviour in young adults at high risk of type 2 diabetes.
methodsData were collected from participants in the intervention group immediately after an educational workshop addressing sedentary time and diabetes risk (n = 71), through phone interviews 6 weeks (n = 45) after the workshop, and at the conclusion of the 12-month trial (n = 10). The two education session facilitators were also interviewed about the intervention.
resultsThe RCT showed no difference in sedentary time at 12 months between intervention and control arms. The lack of behaviour change appeared not to be attributed to the workshops, which were well led and very favourably received according to feedback. However, factors contributing to this lack of behaviour change include lack of perceived health risk from baseline measures feedback; the preference to adopt physically active behaviours rather than to sit less; certain barriers to sitting less; motivational drift after the 3-month follow-up measurements where participants had no contact for a further 9 months; and, for some, unreliability of the self-monitoring tool.
conclusionsThe workshop was well led and well received by the attendees but future interventions need to consider more contact with participants, discuss any specific benefits around simply standing to reduce sitting time, address the barriers to sitting less, and provide a more user-friendly and reliable self-monitoring tool.
trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN08434554 , MRC project 91409. Registered retrospectively on 22 February 2011.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.