↓ Skip to main content

Excessive sitting at work and at home: Correlates of occupational sitting and TV viewing time in working adults

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Excessive sitting at work and at home: Correlates of occupational sitting and TV viewing time in working adults
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2243-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nyssa T. Hadgraft, Brigid M. Lynch, Bronwyn K. Clark, Genevieve N. Healy, Neville Owen, David W. Dunstan

Abstract

Recent evidence links sedentary behaviour (or too much sitting) with poorer health outcomes; many adults accumulate the majority of their daily sitting time through occupational sitting and TV viewing. To further the development and targeting of evidence-based strategies there is a need for identification of the factors associated with higher levels of these behaviours. This study examined socio-demographic and health-related correlates of occupational sitting and of combined high levels of occupational sitting/TV viewing time amongst working adults. Participants were attendees of the third wave (2011/12) of the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study who worked full-time (≥35 h/week; n = 1,235; 38 % women; mean ± SD age 53 ± 7 years). Logistic and multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted (separately for women and men) to assess cross-sectional associations of self-reported occupational sitting time (categorised as high/low based on the median) and also the combination of occupational sitting time/TV viewing time (high/low for each outcome), with a number of potential socio-demographic and health-related correlates. Higher levels of occupational sitting (>6 h/day) were associated with higher household income for both genders. Lower levels of occupational sitting were associated with being older (women only); and, for men only, having a blue collar occupation, having a technical/vocational educational attainment, and undertaking more leisure-time physical activity (LTPA). Attributes associated with high levels of both occupational sitting and TV viewing time included white collar occupation (men only), lower levels of LTPA (both genders), higher BMI (men), and higher energy consumption (women). Higher household income (both genders) and professional/managerial occupations (men only) were correlates of high occupational sitting time, relative to low occupational sitting time, while health-related factors (lower LTPA, higher BMI - men, and higher energy consumption - women) were associated with high levels of both occupational sitting and TV viewing time, relative to low occupational sitting and low TV viewing time. These findings suggest possible high-risk groups that may benefit from targeted interventions. Further research is needed on potentially modifiable environmental and social correlates of occupational sitting time, in order to inform workplace initiatives.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 241 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 15%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 45 19%
Unknown 64 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 15%
Sports and Recreations 29 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 11%
Social Sciences 16 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Other 45 19%
Unknown 77 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,806,061
of 26,542,140 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,596
of 18,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,004
of 281,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#74
of 305 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,542,140 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 18,289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 305 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.