Table 3.
Main association test, action theory tests and conceptual theory testsa
| Main association test: association between intervention and workplace sitting | |||
| τ (SE) | 95% CI | p | |
| −1.105 (0.376) | −1.871, −0.404* | 0.002 | |
| Action theory tests: association between intervention and potential mediators | |||
| Potential mediators | α (SE) | 95% CI | p |
| Knowledge | 0.132 (0.062) | 0.006, 0.252* | 0.040 |
| Attitudes | 0.030 (0.083) | −0.112, 0.197 | 0.724 |
| Self-efficacy | −0.044 (0.112) | −0.259, 0.176 | 0.680 |
| Social support | 0.230 (0.192) | −0.152, 0.622 | 0.231 |
| Intention | −0.325 (0.174) | −0.667, 0.023 | 0.059 |
| Conceptual theory tests: association between potential mediators and workplace sitting | |||
| Potential mediators | β (SE) | 95% CI | p |
| Knowledge | −0.327 (0.469) | −1.262, 0.599 | 0.466 |
| Attitudes | −0.569 (0.340) | −1.263, 0.040 | 0.097 |
| Self-efficacy | 0.044 (0.237) | −0.443, 0.503 | 0.845 |
| Social support | −0.100 (0.165) | −0.417, 0.196 | 0.563 |
| Intention | 0.091 (0.217) | −0.384, 0.497 | 0.657 |
CI confidence interval
aadjusted for the cluster variable, age, gender, education, work hours, work duration, BMI, walking, moderate physical activity, vigorous physical activity, respective baseline value; coefficients results from analyses on the transformed sitting outcome
* p < 0.05