ArticleAIMS public health2017
What are the Facilitators and Obstacles to Participation in Workplace Team Sport? A Qualitative Study.
Article in AIMS public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiological State Evaluation in Working Environment Using Expert System and Random Forest Machine Learning Algorithm.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Sports-related injuries sustained by officers of the State Fire Service on duty - nationwide 7-year follow-up.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- A workplace well-being game intervention for health sciences librarians to address burnout.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- It's Time to Start Changing the Game: A 12-Week Workplace Team Sport Intervention Study.Sports medicine - open · 2017Article
- Team Sport in the Workplace? A RE-AIM Process Evaluation of 'Changing the Game'.AIMS public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Working age adults are failing to meet physical activity recommendations. Inactive behaviours are increasing costs for diminished individual and organisational health. The workplace is a priority setting to promote physical activity, however there is a lack of evidence about why some employees choose to participate in novel workplace activities, such as team sport, whilst others do not. The aim of this study was to explore the complexity of facilitators and obstacles associated with participation in workplace team sport. Twenty-nine semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with office workers (58% female) (36 ± 7.71) from manufacturing, public services, and educational services. Data was analysed through template analysis. Five sub-level (i.e., intrapersonal, interpersonal, organisational, community and societal influences) facilitate participation or create obstacles for participants. Participants were challenged by a lack of competence, self-efficacy, negative sporting ideals and amotivation. Unhealthy competition, an unstable work-life balance and unsupportive colleagues created obstacles to participation. An unsupportive organisation and workplace culture placed demands on workplace champions, funding, facilities and communication. Healthy competitions, high perceptions of competence and self-efficacy, and being motivated autonomously enabled participation. Further, relatedness and social support created a physical activity culture where flexible working was encouraged and team sport was promoted in accessible locations within the organisation. Researchers should consider accounting for complexity of these influences. A participatory approach may tailor interventions to individual organisations and the employees that work within them. Interventions whereby autonomy, competence and relatedness are supported are recommended. This may be achieved by adapting sports and training workplace champions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.