Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38450146›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

The MedXFit-study - CrossFit as a workplace health intervention: a one-year, prospective, controlled, longitudinal, intervention study.

Tom Brandt, Elisabeth Heinz, Yannik Klaaßen, Selina Limbara, Marian Mörsdorf, Timo Schinköthe, Annette Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tom BrandtInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Elisabeth HeinzInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Yannik KlaaßenInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Selina LimbaraInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Marian MörsdorfInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Timo SchinkötheComprehensive Cancer Center Munich CCCLMU, Munich, Germany.
Annette SchmidtInstitute of Sports Science, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Universität der Bundeswehr München · DEComprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Workplace health interventions aim to motivate employees toward healthy behaviors to improve fitness and health in the long-term. We investigated whether CrossFit® is an effective training concept to achieve these goals in inactive employees with sedentary occupations. Methods: The study followed a prospective, controlled intervention design. Employees were invited to participate in intervention group (IG) or control group (CG) on their own preferences. Inclusion criteria were a predominantly sedentary occupation and execution of less than two muscle and/or mobility enhancing training sessions per week at the time of enrolling. The IG did at least two times a week a CrossFit training of 1 h. Mobility, strength, well-being, and back-issues were measured at the beginning, after 6, and 12 months. Participants in the CG were free to choose any other activities offered at the same time (e.g., circuit training, meditation, full body stability training). Adherence, respectively, behavioral change and maintenance qualities were evaluated based on the COM-B system and presence of behavior maintenance motives. Results: 89 employees were enrolled into the trial, from where 21 dropped out due to external factors (24%). From the remaining participants, 10 out of 39 (26%) in the IG and 1 out of 29 (4%) in the CG stopped for intrinsic reasons, leading to a non-adherence to the intervention of 22 percentage points. Motivation for behavioral change and maintenance in the IG was primarily driven by enhanced physical and psychological capability. Development of physical capability was evident by significant improvements ( Conclusion: CrossFit is a motivating training concept that led to long-term health and fitness improvements in inactive employees doing sedentary work and should be given greater consideration in workplace health promotion.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyWorkplaceExerciseHealth BehaviorHumansProspective Studiesback painbehavioral change and maintenanceexercisefunctional fitnessmilitarymobilitystrengthwell-being

Identifiers

PMID38450146
PMCPMC10915069
OpenAlexW4392002057

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.