Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33674371›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Using financial incentives to increase physical activity among employees as a strategy of workplace health promotion: protocol for a systematic review.

Thomas Leonhard Heise, Jennifer Frense, Lara Christianson, Till Seuring

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Incentives for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Contingency Management for Drug Use Disorders: Meta-Analysis and Application of Tolin's Criteria.Clinical psychology : a publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Effects of a Physical Exercise Intervention on Pain in Workplaces: A Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Thomas Leonhard HeiseDepartment of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen, Germany heise@leibniz-bips.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0482-7657
Jennifer FrenseDepartment of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen, Germany.
Lara ChristiansonAdministration, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen, Germany.
Till SeuringDepartment of Living Conditions, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionShifts towards sedentary occupations in high-income countries (HIC) over the last decades and the health burden associated with physical inactivity have led to innovative strategies to promote physical activity (PA) among the working population. Financial rewards have been proposed to incentivise participation in programmes promoting PA or the achievement of PA-related goals. This review will assess (1) effects of financial incentives provided by employers to promote PA on programme adherence/compliance, PA and closely linked outcomes (eg, days of sick leave), (2) effects according to age, gender, implementation and study quality and (3) intervention costs and cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search for relevant studies in eight academic databases, two grey literature resources, two trial registers and on five organisational websites (oldest record/content to present). We will include (cluster) randomised controlled studies with a financial incentive to promote PA as intervention (≥1 months), conducted among employees in HIC and reporting data on at least one primary outcome in stages of screening (title/abstract, full text). To assess study quality and potential bias, we will use the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). We will extract study data into prepiloted extraction sheets. Each task in screening, quality assessment and data extraction will be done by two authors independently. If a sufficient number of studies provide homogeneous data (ie, similar follow-up) for primary outcomes, meta-analyses will be carried out. We will report GRADE ratings to provide information on the certainty of the evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: For this review, no ethical approval will be required because only data of studies in which informed consent was obtained will be considered and analysed. The final review manuscript will be published in an Open Access journal. To ensure effective promotion of this review project, we will disseminate major findings through relevant communication channels. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020184345.

Indexed as

MotivationWorkplaceExerciseHealth PromotionReview Literature as TopicSedentary Behaviorhealth economicshealth policypreventive medicine

Identifiers

PMID33674371
PMCPMC7938995

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.