ArticleBJGP open2022
The views of GPs about using sit-stand desks: an observational study.
Article in BJGP open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Work stress, dietary patterns, and physical activity on metabolic and hepatic biomarkers among healthcare professionals in Ghana.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of general practitioners using sit-stand desks: a feasibility trial.BMJ open · 2024Article
- The relationship between general practitioner movement behaviours with burnout and fatigue.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Burnout, psychological wellbeing, and musculoskeletal complaints in UK GPs: an observational study.BJGP open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOccupational sitting is associated with negative health outcomes. Sit-stand workstations have been shown to reduce sitting time in office workers, although there is no evidence on whether this change to practice would be acceptable to GPs.
aimTo investigate GPs views about the use of sit-stand desks within general practice and the potential impact they may have on the nature and quality of consultations with adult patients. DESIGN &
settingObservational study involving GPs located across the UK.
methodAn online survey was emailed to members of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and shared on social media. Only GPs working in the UK were eligible. The survey included questions on socio-demographics, GPs views about the use of sit-stand desks within their work, their levels of physical activity, total time spent sitting at work each day, and time spent at work.
results14 142 surveys were sent by the RCGP to their members with 810 GPs responding, with a further 33 responding via social media. 60.6% of GPs would like a sit-stand desks in their consultation room, while 19.2% already had one. Most GPs thought sit-stand desks could be used for telephone consultations (91.9%) and administration tasks (92.3%). There was less agreement about whether they could be used during face-to-face consultations (35.0% agreed), with the potential impact on the doctor-patient relationship raised as the primary concern.
conclusionThe implementation of sit-stand desks had support from GPs, but their possible impact on the doctor-patient relationship should be considered in future research.
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.