ArticleBMC public health2025
Exploring experiences and perceptions of early withdrawal from a height-adjustable sit-to-stand desk intervention among South African office workers.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing sedentary behaviour and burden of non-communicable diseases among office workers raise significant concerns. Height-adjustable sit-to-stand desks offer a potential solution, yet uptake remains challenging, limiting their effectiveness and long-term adoption. The experiences of office workers who withdrew from a height-adjustable sit-to-stand desk intervention need to be explored to inform program refinement.
methodsA qualitative approach was used, with pre-identified themes guiding data collection, while subthemes emerged inductively from transcripts and field notes. Twelve participants with a mean age of 46.0 years were conveniently sampled. These office workers withdrew from a height-adjustable standing desk randomised controlled trial and did not form any part of other studies. One-on-one semi-structured interviews guided data collection about the participants' experiences and reasons for early withdrawal from the intervention. Data were thematically analysed using Atlas.ti 23.
resultsMost participants were female (n = 10, 83.3%). All participants completed high school, while 41.7% completed a postgraduate degree from a university and credit bureau company. Despite the participants' understanding of the benefits of height-adjustable sit-to-stand workstations, most of the participants discontinued the intervention due to perceived barriers that aligned with the themes: "discomforts and dislikes", "applicability and practicality", "people's perception-i.e., what other people will say" and "transitioning to electronic sit-to-stand desks".
conclusionsThe findings of this study may assist in formulating a policy to improve compliance with height-adjustable sit-to-stand workstations in the workplace. Future studies should consider individual preferences, design, functionality, knowledge, and motivation to ensure effective implementation, utilisation, and compliance with height-adjustable sit-to-stand workstations.
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.