Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28339829›Full record

ArticleOccupational medicine (Oxford, England)2017

Perceived office environments and occupational physical activity in office-based workers.

A Sawyer, L Smith, M Ucci, R Jones, A Marmot, A Fisher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Occupational medicine (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Underlying Factors Explaining Physical Behaviors among Office Workers-An Exploratory Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  5. Effects of Occupational and Leisure-Time Physical Activities on Insomnia in Korean Firefighters.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

A SawyerHealth Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
L SmithThe Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, East Road, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK.
M UcciUCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, Central House, University College London, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London WC1H 0NN, UK.
R JonesGlasgow Centre for Population Health, Third Floor, Olympia Building, Bridgeton Cross, Glasgow G40 2QH, UK.
A MarmotUCL Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, 132 Hampstead Road, University College London, London NW1 2PS, UK.
A FisherHealth Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals in office-based occupations have low levels of physical activity but there is little research into the socio-ecological correlates of workplace activity.

aimsTo identify factors contributing to office-based workers' perceptions of the office environment and explore cross-sectional relationships between these factors and occupational physical activity.

methodsParticipants in the Active Buildings study reported perceptions of their office environment using the Movement at Work Survey. A principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted on survey items. A sub-sample wore the ActivPAL3TM accelerometer for ≥3 workdays to measure occupational step count, standing, sitting and sit-to-stand transitions. Linear regression analyses assessed relationships between environmental perceptions and activity.

resultsThere were 433 participants, with accelerometer data available for 115 participants across 11 organ izations. The PCA revealed four factors: (i) perceived distance to office destinations, (ii) perceived office aesthetics and comfort, (iii) perceived office social environment and (iv) perceived management discouragement of unscheduled breaks. Younger participants perceived office destinations as being closer to their desk. Younger and female participants perceived more positive office social environments; there were no other socio-demographic differences. Within the sub-sample with accelerometer data, perceived discouragement of breaks by management was related to occupational step count/hour (B = -64.5; 95% CI -109.7 to -19.2). No other environmental perceptions were related to activity or sitting.

conclusionsPerceived managerial discouragement of breaks could be related to meaningful decreases in occupational step count. Future research should aim to elucidate the role of the workplace socio-cultural environment in occupational walking, with a focus on the role of management.

Indexed as

ExerciseOccupational HealthWorkplaceAccelerometryAdultEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSedentary BehaviorSelf ReportSocial EnvironmentSurveys and QuestionnairesWalkingMovementsedentary jobssocial environmentwork environment.

Identifiers

PMID28339829
PMCPMC5927093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.