Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35354447›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Office workers' perspectives on physical activity and sedentary behaviour: a qualitative study.

Lorraine L Landais, Judith G M Jelsma, Idske R Dotinga, Danielle R M Timmermans, Evert A L M Verhagen, Olga C Damman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Promoting an active choice among physically inactive adults: a randomised web-based four-arm experiment.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022
    Trial
  4. Economic Evaluations of Physical Exercise at Work: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Lorraine L LandaisDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.landais@amsterdamumc.nl.
Judith G M JelsmaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Idske R DotingaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Danielle R M TimmermansDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Evert A L M VerhagenDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Olga C DammanDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Boelelaan, 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOffice workers spend a significant part of their workday sitting. Interventions that aim to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity might be more effective if greater attention is paid to individual perspectives that influence behavioural choices, including beliefs and values. This study aimed to gain insight into office workers' perspectives on physical activity and sedentary behaviour.

methodsSixteen Dutch office workers (50% female) from different professions participated in semi-structured face-to-face interviews in March 2019. To facilitate the interviews, participants received a sensitizing booklet one week before the interview. The booklet aimed to trigger them to reflect on their physical activity and sedentary behaviour and on their values in life. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and coded following codebook thematic analysis.

resultsSix themes were identified: 1) beliefs about health effects are specific regarding physical activity, but superficial regarding sedentary behaviour; 2) in addition to 'health' as a value, other values are also given priority; 3) motivations to engage in physical activity mainly stem from prioritizing the value 'health', reflected by a desire to both achieve positive short/mid-term outcomes and to prevent long-term negative outcomes; 4) attitudes towards physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour are diverse and depend on individual values and previous experiences; 5) perceived barriers depend on internal and external factors; 6) supporting factors are related to support and information in the social and physical environment.

conclusionsThe great value that office workers attach to health is reflected in their motivations and attitudes regarding physical activity. Increasing office workers' knowledge of the health risks of prolonged sitting may therefore increase their motivation to sit less. Although 'health' is considered important, other values, including social and work-related values, are sometimes prioritized. We conclude that interventions that aim to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity among office workers could be improved by informing about health effects of sedentary behaviour and short/mid-term benefits of physical activity, including mental health benefits. Moreover, interventions could frame physical activity as congruent with values and support value-congruent choices. Finally, the work environment could support physical activity and interruption of sedentary behaviour.

Indexed as

ExerciseSedentary BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMotivationQualitative ResearchSitting PositionBeliefsOffice workersPerspectivePhysical activityQualitative researchSedentary behaviourValues

Identifiers

PMID35354447
PMCPMC8966601

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.