Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30944728›Full record

ReviewDigital health

Mobile health interventions to promote physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour in the workplace: A systematic review.

Sarah Ann Buckingham, Andrew James Williams, Karyn Morrissey, Lisa Price, John Harrison

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 16 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

98 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Sarah Ann BuckinghamEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2215-5516
Andrew James WilliamsEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, UK.
Karyn MorrisseyEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, UK.
Lisa PriceSport and Health Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
John HarrisonOccupational Health Support Unit, Devon and Cornwall Police, Middlemoor, Exeter, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of mobile health (mHealth) technology (including wearable activity monitors and smartphone applications) for promoting physical activity (PA) and reducing sedentary behaviour (SB) in workplace settings.

methodsSystematic searches were conducted in seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane library). Studies were included if mHealth was a major intervention component, PA/SB was a primary outcome, and participants were recruited and/or the intervention was delivered in the workplace. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool. Interventions were coded for behaviour change techniques (BCTs) using the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy.

resultsTwenty-five experimental and quasi-experimental studies were included. Studies were highly heterogeneous and only one was rated as 'strong' methodological quality. Common BCTs included self-monitoring, feedback, goal-setting and social comparison. A total of 14/25 (56%) studies reported a significant increase in PA, and 4/10 (40%) reported a significant reduction in sedentary time; 11/16 (69%) studies reported a significant impact on secondary outcomes including reductions in weight, systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol. While overall acceptability was high, a large decline in technology use and engagement was observed over time.

conclusionsWhile methodological quality was generally weak, there is reasonable evidence for mHealth in a workplace context as a feasible, acceptable and effective tool to promote PA. The impact in the longer term and on SB is less clear. Higher quality, mixed methods studies are needed to explore the reasons for decline in engagement with time and the longer-term potential of mHealth in workplace interventions.

Indexed as

behaviour changemobile healthoccupational healthphysical activitysedentary behaviourSystematic reviewworkplace

Identifiers

PMID30944728
PMCPMC6437332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.