ArticleTrials2020
Reducing sitting at work: process evaluation of the SMArT Work (Stand More At Work) intervention.
Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of mHealth Interventions Aimed at Promoting Physical Activity and Reducing Sedentary Behavior on Work-Related Outcomes Among Workers: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- The Physical Activity at Work (PAW) Program in Thai Office Workers: Mixed Methods Process Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Are there compensatory behaviors in response to a sit-stand desk intervention?Journal of occupational health · 2024Trial
- The structured health intervention for truckers (SHIFT) cluster randomised controlled trial: a mixed methods process evaluation.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Trial
- Technology-Driven Ergonomics: A Narrative Review of Innovative Strategies for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders in Modern Work Environments.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Using the behavior change wheel (BCW) framework for health interventions focusing on diet and physical activity in the workplace: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Implementation and engagement of the SMART Work & Life sitting reduction intervention: an exploratory analysis on intervention effectiveness.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023Article
- Participant and workplace champion experiences of an intervention designed to reduce sitting time in desk-based workers: SMART work & life.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023Article
- Article
- Feasibility and Acceptability of an Internet of Things-Enabled Sedentary Behavior Intervention: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The Frail-LESS (LEss Sitting and Sarcopenia in Frail older adults) intervention to improve sarcopenia and maintain independent living via reductions in prolonged sitting: a randomised controlled feasibility trial protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Feasibility of Reducing and Breaking Up University Students' Sedentary Behaviour: Pilot Trial and Process Evaluation.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOffice-based workers accumulate high amounts of sitting time. Stand More At Work (SMArT Work) aimed to reduce occupational sitting time and a cluster randomised controlled trial demonstrated it was successful in achieving this aim. The purpose of this paper is to present the process evaluation of the SMArT Work intervention.
methodsQuestionnaire data were collected from intervention participants at 6 months (n = 58) and 12 months (n = 55). Questionnaires sought feedback on the different components of the intervention (education, height-adjustable desk, Darma cushion, behaviour feedback, progress chats (coaching) with research team, action planning/goal setting diary) and experiences of evaluation measures. Control participants (n = 37) were asked via questionnaire at 12-month follow-up about the impact of the study on their behaviour and any lifestyle changes made during the study. Participants from both arms were invited to focus groups to gain a deeper understanding of their experiences on completion of 12-month follow-up.
resultsFocus group and questionnaire data showed a positive attitude towards the height-adjustable workstation with a high proportion of participants using it every day (62%). Most participants (92%) felt the education seminar increased their awareness of the health consequences of too much sitting and motivated them to change their behaviour. Receiving feedback on their sitting time and support from the research team also encouraged behaviour change. The Darma cushion and action planning/goal setting diary were seen to be less helpful for behaviour change. Benefits experienced included fewer aches and pains, improved cognitive functioning, increased productivity, more energy and positive feelings about general health.
conclusionsKey elements of the programme identified as facilitating behaviour change were the educational seminar, the height-adjustable workstation, behavioural feedback and regular contact with research staff through regular progress chats.
trial registrationISRCTN: ISRCTN10967042. Registered on 2 February 2015.
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.