Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42471677›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2026

Device-measured movement behaviours and cancer incidence in a population sample of UK adults: Dual 24-hour analyses of postural and intensity compositions.

John J Mitchell, Raaj Kishore Biswas, Nicholas A Koemel, Matthew N Ahmadi, Joanna M Blodgett, Karen Canfell, I-Min Lee, Christine M Friedenreich, Armando Teixeira-Pinto, Peter A Cistulli and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

John J MitchellInstitute of Sport Exercise & Health, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University College London, London, UK. john.mitchell.12@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2719-5536
Raaj Kishore BiswasCharles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nicholas A KoemelTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Matthew N AhmadiTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Joanna M BlodgettInstitute of Sport Exercise & Health, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Karen CanfellThe Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney and Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
I-Min LeeDepartment of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Christine M FriedenreichDepartments of Oncology and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Armando Teixeira-PintoCentre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Peter A CistulliCharles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Dorothea DumuidAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, 5000, Australia.
Anthony D OkelyAustralia and Early Start, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Abigail FisherResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Mark Hamer *Institute of Sport Exercise & Health, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Emmanuel Stamatakis *Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. emmanuel.stamatakis@monash.edu.

Funding

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council APP1180812Cancer Research UK PRCPJT-Nov23/100005National Health and Medical Research Council APP 1194510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInsufficient physical activity (PA) and excessive sedentary behaviour is associated with several cancers. Personalised approaches to increasing healthy movement behaviours over unhealthy behaviours may be more effective than a one-size-fits-all approach. Exploring both postures, and intensities across the 24-hour day may reveal actionable behavioural alternatives from current guidance.

methodsUsing a novel dual-compositional approach, we assessed how differences in participant's composition of 24-hour daily movement (postures and intensities) and sleep are differentially associated with PA-related cancer incidence (a composite of 13 sites linked with physical inactivity). This prospective analysis involved adults drawn from the UK Biobank accelerometry subsample each followed-up by health linkage. Participant's daily movement was classified into two 24-hour compositions. Composition 1 (posture-focused): sleep duration, sedentary behaviour (SB), standing, moving at any intensity. Composition 2 (intensity-focused): sleep duration, sedentary time (ST), light PA (LPA), moderate PA (MPA), and vigorous PA (VPA). Secondary analysis combined VPA and MPA as moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA). PA-related cancer diagnoses were captured from health registry data for up to 9.5 years (y). Cox-proportional hazards models were adjusted for age, sex, education, smoking, alcohol, diet, parental cancer history, cardiovascular disease and medication use.

resultsAnalyses included 59,218 (55% female) participants (mean [SD] age: 61.7 [7.8]y), with a median follow-up of 8.0y [IQR: 7.4-8.5y; 464,640 person years] with 2,385 (4%) incident cancer events. Among the average, active participant, greater moving in place of other behaviours was associated with lower cancer risk, e.g. theoretically replacing 15 min of sleep or SB with 15 min of moving was associated with hazard ratios (HR) of 0.98 (95% Confidence Interval (95%CI): 0.97-0.99) and 0.98 (95%CI: 0.97-0.99), respectively. Similar risk reduction was observed with 30 min additional standing in place of sleep or SB. Regarding intensity, greater MVPA, in place of any behaviour proved most robustly associated with lower risk, although notably, the VPA component within MVPA proved the critical intensity.

conclusionsBeyond MVPA, moving at any intensity, in place of other postures, was associated with reduced risk of cancer. However, greater standing may also provide a plausible behavioural adjunct or alternative, warranting further investigation.

Indexed as

ExerciseNeoplasmsPostureAccelerometryAdultAgedFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedMovementProspective StudiesSedentary BehaviorSleepSleep DurationAccelerometryCohort studiesEpidemiologyMachine learningMovement behaviourPostureWearables

Identifiers

PMID42471677
PMCPMC13455226

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.