ArticleBMC public health2025
The impact and perceptions of standing desk interventions on movement patterns and physical, mental, and academic outcomes in university students: a scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Can exercise snacks alleviate musculoskeletal discomfort in prolonged sitting? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of standing desks may reduce sedentary behavior and, in turn, improve other health and academic outcomes. However, the evidence is sparse among university settings. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and map evidence for the effects of standing desk interventions on sedentary behavior and physical, mental, and academic outcomes in university students, as well as instructors and students' perceptions of this type of equipment in the classroom.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, PubPsych and ERIC databases were searched for qualitative and quantitative studies from their inception to 2024. Narrative synthesis and network plots were used to summarize the available evidence.
resultsSeventeen studies involving 2886 university students and 163 instructors were included. Fourteen studies were experimental and three were cross-sectional. In seven studies standing desks improved movement patterns (sitting and standing time in the classroom) and in four studies improved mental health outcomes (anxiety, mood, stress, and positive or negative feelings). Four studies analyzed pain and discomfort, one found significant improvements and three found mixed results. Eleven studies analyzed academic and classroom outcomes and seven found significant improvements in the standing desks group and five did not. Additionally, the use of standing desks was accepted and positively perceived by students in ten studies and by instructors in two.
conclusionsThe implementation of standing desks at university settings could be a behavioral intervention for improving movement patterns and mental health. However, the extant evidence is sparse; further long-term, high-quality trials are needed to draw robust conclusions.
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.