Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38457379›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

A systematic scoping review of health-promoting interventions for contact centre employees examined through a behaviour change wheel lens.

Zoe Bell, Lorna Porcellato, Paula Holland, Abigail Morris, Chloe Smith, Charlotte Haines, Lee Graves

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. National implementation trial of BeUpstanding™: an online initiative for workers to sit less and move more.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024
    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.

Zoe BellResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9330-4358
Lorna PorcellatoPublic Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Paula HollandDivision of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
Abigail MorrisDivision of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2800-9325
Chloe SmithPublic Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Charlotte HainesPublic Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Lee GravesResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3323-313X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSocial determinants of health and poor working conditions contribute to excessive sickness absence and attrition in contact centre advisors. With no recent review conducted, the current scoping review is needed to investigate the volume, effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of health-promoting interventions for contact centre advisors. This will inform the adoption and implementation of evidence-based practice, and future research.

methodsSearches conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science) and reference checking in February 2023 identified health-promoting interventions for contact centre advisors. Extracted and coded data from eligible interventions were systematically synthesised using the nine intervention functions of the Behaviour Change Wheel and behaviour change technique taxonomy.

resultsThis scoping review identified a low number of high quality and peer-reviewed health-promoting intervention studies for contact centre advisors (28 studies since 2002). Most interventions were conducted in high-income countries with office-based advisors, predominantly using environmental restructuring and training strategies to improve health. Most interventions reported positive effectiveness results for the primary intended outcomes, which were broadly organised into: i) health behaviours (sedentary behaviour, physical activity, smoking); ii) physical health outcomes (musculoskeletal health, visual health, vocal health, sick building syndrome); iii) mental health outcomes (stress, job control, job satisfaction, wellbeing). Few interventions evaluated acceptability and feasibility.

conclusionThere is little evidence on the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of health-promoting interventions for contact centre advisors. Evidence is especially needed in low-to-middle income countries, and for remote/hybrid, nightshift, older and disabled advisors.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth PromotionOccupational HealthBehavior TherapyHumansSedentary Behavior

Identifiers

PMID38457379
PMCPMC10923409

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.