ArticleJRSM cardiovascular disease
Are physical activity levels of health care professionals consistent with activity guidelines? A prospective cohort study in New Zealand.
Article in JRSM cardiovascular disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Device-measured physical activity, sedentary behaviour and cardiometabolic health and fitness across occupational groups: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2019Pooled it
- Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Motivation to Exercise: A Cross-Sectional Study in Healthcare Professionals.Portuguese journal of public health · 2025Article
- Physical activity levels of allied health professionals working in a large Australian metropolitan health district - an observational study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to estimate the level of physical activity undertaken by health care professionals and the proportion that achieved a daily target of 10,000 steps.
designThis was a prospective cohort study.
settingParticipants were recruited in Wellington Regional Hospital, a tertiary hospital in New Zealand.
participantsNeurology, Cardiology, and Endocrinology staff were invited to participate.
main outcome measuresPedometer-measured step counts were recorded over seven days and the proportion that achieved a daily target of 10,000 steps was calculated.
resultsWe included 50 staff in the study. The mean daily step count was 10,620 (standard deviation = 3141) with a median daily step count of 10,606 (interquartile range = 7791-12,469). Sixty-five per cent of the staff achieved 10,000 steps per day.
conclusionThis cohort was more active compared to other pedometer-based studies in health care professionals. The daily target of 10,000 steps per day was achieved at a higher proportion than reported in international studies and the general New Zealand.
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.