Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29209512›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2017

The ReSiT study (reducing sitting time): rationale and protocol for an exploratory pilot study of an intervention to reduce sitting time among office workers.

Benjamin Gardner, Stephen Dewitt, Lee Smith, John P Buckley, Stuart J H Biddle, Louise Mansfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Benjamin GardnerDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Room 2.11, Addison House, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1223-5934
Stephen DewittDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Room 2.11, Addison House, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL UK.
Lee SmithThe Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
John P BuckleyInstitute of Medicine, University of Chester, Chester, UK.
Stuart J H BiddleUniversity of Southern Queensland, Queensland, Australia.
Louise MansfieldDepartment of Life Sciences, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N008979/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDesk-based workers engage in long periods of uninterrupted sitting time, which has been associated with morbidity and premature mortality. Previous workplace intervention trials have demonstrated the potential of providing sit-stand workstations, and of administering motivational behaviour change techniques, for reducing sitting time. Yet, few studies have combined these approaches or explored the acceptability of discrete sitting-reduction behaviour change strategies. This paper describes the rationale for a sitting-reduction intervention that combines sit-stand workstations with motivational techniques, and procedures for a pilot study to explore the acceptability of core intervention components among university office workers.

methodsThe intervention is based on a theory and evidence-based analysis of why office workers sit, and how best to reduce sitting time. It seeks to enhance motivation and capability, as well as identify opportunities, required to reduce sitting time. Thirty office workers will participate in the pilot study. They will complete an initial awareness-raising monitoring and feedback task and subsequently receive a sit-stand workstation for a 12-week period. They will also select from a 'menu' of behaviour change techniques tailored to self-declared barriers to sitting reduction, effectively co-producing and personally tailoring their intervention. Interviews at 1, 6, and 12 weeks post-intervention will explore intervention acceptability. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this will be the first study to explore direct feedback from office workers on the acceptability of discrete tailored sitting-reduction intervention components that they have received. Participants' choice of and reflections on intervention techniques will aid identification of strategies suitable for inclusion in the next iteration of the intervention, which will be delivered in a self-administered format to minimise resource burden.

trial registrationISRCTN29395780 (registered 21 November 2016).

Indexed as

Behaviour changePhysical activitySedentary behaviourSit-stand desksSitting

Identifiers

PMID29209512
PMCPMC5704376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.