| Title |
Are temporal patterns of sitting associated with obesity among blue-collar workers? A cross sectional study using accelerometers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-016-2803-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nidhi Gupta, David M. Hallman, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Mette Aadahl, Marie Birk Jørgensen, Andreas Holtermann |
| Abstract |
Little is known about associations of temporal patterns of sitting (i.e., distribution of sitting across time) with obesity. We aimed investigating the association between temporal patterns of sitting (long, moderate and brief uninterrupted bouts) and obesity indicators (body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and fat percentage), independently from moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and total sitting time among blue-collar workers. Workers (n = 205) wore Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometers on the thigh and trunk for 1-4 working days. Using the validated Acti4 software, the total sitting time and time spent sitting in brief (≤5 mins), moderate (>5 and ≤30 mins), and long (>30mins) bouts on working days were determined for the whole day, and for leisure and work separately. BMI (kg/m(2)), waist circumference (cm) and fat percentage were objectively measured. Results of linear regression analysis adjusted for multiple confounders indicated that brief bouts of sitting was negatively associated with obesity for the whole day (BMI, P < 0.01; fat percentage, P < 0.01; waist circumference, P < 0.01) and work (BMI, P < 0.01; fat percentage, P < 0.01; waist circumference, P < 0.01), but not for leisure. Sitting time in long bouts was positively associated with obesity indicators for the whole day (waist circumference, P = 0.05) and work (waist circumference, P = 0.01; BMI, P = 0.04), but not leisure. For the whole day as well as for work, brief bouts and long bouts of sitting showed opposite associations with obesity even after adjusting for MVPA and total sitting time, while sitting during leisure did not show these associations. Thus, the temporal distribution of sitting seems to influence the relationship between sitting and obesity. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 25 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 9 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 33 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,439,846
of 22,846,662 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,874
of 14,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,774
of 400,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#206
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,846,662 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,886 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 400,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.