SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Are Office-Based Workplace Interventions Designed to Reduce Sitting Time Cost-Effective Primary Prevention Measures for Cardiovascular Disease? A Systematic Review and Modelled Economic Evaluation.
Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modelling the potential health and economic benefits of reducing population sitting time in Australia.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Trial
- A Cost and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Stand More AT Work (SMArT Work) Intervention.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Trial
- A cloud-based medical device for predicting cardiac risk in suspected coronary artery disease: a rapid review and conceptual economic model.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Review
- Work-related stressors and coping behaviors among leaders in small and medium-sized IT and technological services enterprises.BMC public health · 2023Article
- The Cost-Effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life Intervention for Reducing Sitting Time.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Evidence base of economic evaluations of workplace-based interventions reducing occupational sitting time: an integrative review.BMJ open · 2022Review
- Evaluating a multi-component intervention to reduce and break up office workers' sitting with sit-stand desks using the APEASE criteria.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Can Physical Activity While Sedentary Produce Health Benefits? A Single-Arm Randomized Trial.Sports medicine - open · 2020Article
- Should We Scale-Up? A Mixed Methods Process Evaluation of an Intervention Targeting Sedentary Office Workers Using the RE-AIM QuEST Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Diabetes in the Workplace: Risks and Remedies.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolismArticle
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
objectivesTo assess the cost-effectiveness of workplace-delivered interventions designed to reduce sitting time as primary prevention measures for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in Australia.
methodsA Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a workplace intervention for the primary prevention of CVD amongst office-based workers. An updated systematic review and a meta-analysis of workplace interventions that aim to reduce sitting time was conducted to inform the intervention effect. The primary outcome was workplace standing time. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for this intervention measured against current practice. Costs (in Australia dollars) and benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Both deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsThe updated systematic review identified only one new study. Only the multicomponent intervention that included a sit-and-stand workstation showed statistically significant changes in the standing time compared to the control. The intervention was associated with both higher costs ($6820 versus $6524) and benefits (23.28 versus 23.27, quality-adjusted life year, QALYs), generating an ICER of $43,825/QALY. The DSA showed that target age group for the intervention, relative risk of CVD relative to the control and intervention cost were the key determinants of the ICER. The base case results were within the range of the 95% confidence interval and the intervention had a 85.2% probability of being cost-effective.
conclusionsA workplace-delivered intervention in the office-based setting including a sit-and-stand desk component is a cost-effective strategy for the primary prevention of CVD. It offers a new option and location when considering interventions to target the growing CVD burden.
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.