Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29986592›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of health promotion : AJHP2019

Enrollment Strategies, Barriers to Participation, and Reach of a Workplace Intervention Targeting Sedentary Behavior.

Sarah L Mullane, Sarah A Rydell, Miranda L Larouche, Meynard John L Toledo, Linda H Feltes, Brenna Vuong, Noe C Crespo, Glenn A Gaesser, Paul A Estabrooks, Mark A Pereira and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of health promotion : AJHP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. National implementation trial of BeUpstanding™: an online initiative for workers to sit less and move more.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024
    Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Sarah L Mullane1 School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1819-7409
Sarah A Rydell2 Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Miranda L Larouche1 School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Meynard John L Toledo1 School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Linda H Feltes3 Minnesota Department of Health, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Brenna Vuong4 Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Noe C Crespo5 Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA.
Glenn A Gaesser1 School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Paul A Estabrooks6 College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Mark A Pereira2 Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Matthew P Buman1 School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.

Funding

Stand and Move at Work: A Group-Randomized TrialR01CA198971 · NCI · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI BUMAN, MATTHEW P, PEREIRA, MARK A · 2015 to 2018
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA198971
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo review enrollment strategies, participation barriers, and program reach of a large, 2-year workplace intervention targeting sedentary behavior. APPROACH: Cross-sectional, retrospective review.

settingTwenty-four worksites balanced across academic, industry, and government sectors in Minneapolis/Saint Paul (Minnesota) and Phoenix (Arizona) regions.

participantsFull-time (≥30+ h/wk), sedentary office workers.

methodsReach was calculated as the proportion of eligible employees who enrolled in the intervention ([N enrolled/(proportion of eligible employees × N total employees)] × 100). Mean (1 standard deviation) and median worksite sizes were calculated at each enrollment step. Participation barriers and modifications were recorded by the research team. A survey was sent to a subset of nonparticipants (N = 57), and thematic analyses were conducted to examine reasons for nonparticipation, positive impacts, and negative experiences.

resultsEmployer reach was 65% (56 worksites invited to participate; 66% eligible of 56 responses; 24 enrolled). Employee reach was 58% (1317 invited to participate, 83% eligible of 906 responses; 632 enrolled). Postrandomization, on average, 59% (15%) of the worksites participated. Eighteen modifications were developed to overcome participant-, context-, and research-related participation barriers.

conclusionA high proportion of worksites and employees approached to participate in a sedentary behavior reduction intervention engaged in the study. Interventions that provide flexible enrollment, graded participant engagement options, and adopt a participant-centered approach may facilitate workplace intervention success.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthSedentary BehaviorCounselingCross-Sectional StudiesEnvironment DesignExerciseFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesWorkplaceemployee engagementparticipation barriersreachsedentary behaviorworkplace

Identifiers

PMID29986592
PMCPMC7702267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.