Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29857575›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

Associations between the Objectively Measured Office Environment and Workplace Step Count and Sitting Time: Cross-Sectional Analyses from the Active Buildings Study.

Abi Fisher, Marcella Ucci, Lee Smith, Alexia Sawyer, Richard Spinney, Marina Konstantatou, Alexi Marmot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Temporal dynamics of sitting behavior at work.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Abi FisherDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1⁻19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. abigail.fisher@ucl.ac.uk.
Marcella UcciBartlett School of Environmental Design and Engineering, UCL Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn place, London WC1H 0NN, UK. m.ucci@ucl.ac.uk.
Lee SmithThe Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK. Lee.Smith@anglia.ac.uk.
Alexia SawyerDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1⁻19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. alexia.sawyer@ucl.ac.uk.
Richard SpinneyComplex Systems Research Group & Centre for Complex Systems, Faculty of Engineering and IT, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. richard.spinney@sydney.edu.au.
Marina KonstantatouStructures Group, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK. mk822@cam.ac.uk.
Alexi MarmotInstitute for Digital Innovation in the Built Environment, UCL Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, 132 Hampstead Road, London NW1 2PS, UK. a.marmot@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Office-based workers spend a large proportion of the day sitting and tend to have low overall activity levels. Despite some evidence that features of the external physical environment are associated with physical activity, little is known about the influence of the spatial layout of the internal environment on movement, and the majority of data use self-report. This study investigated associations between objectively-measured sitting time and activity levels and the spatial layout of office floors in a sample of UK office-based workers. Participants wore activPAL accelerometers for at least three consecutive workdays. Primary outcomes were steps and proportion of sitting time per working hour. Primary exposures were office spatial layout, which was objectively-measured by deriving key spatial variables: 'distance from each workstation to key office destinations', 'distance from participant's workstation to all other workstations', 'visibility of co-workers', and workstation 'closeness'. 131 participants from 10 organisations were included. Fifty-four per cent were female, 81% were white, and the majority had a managerial or professional role (72%) in their organisation. The average proportion of the working hour spent sitting was 0.7 (SD 0.15); participants took on average 444 (SD 210) steps per working hour. Models adjusted for confounders revealed significant negative associations between step count and distance from each workstation to all other office destinations (e.g., B = -4.66, 95% CI: -8.12, -1.12,

Indexed as

ExerciseSedentary BehaviorSitting PositionWorkplaceAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf Reportoccupational physical activityoffice-based worksedentary behaviour

Identifiers

PMID29857575
PMCPMC6025117

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.