Healy 2013

Methods	Non‐random allocation by clusters (floor): CBA Unblinded Study duration: 3 months Drop out:14% Location: Melbourne, Australia Recruitment: an invitation email was sent to all potential participants to attend one of two 30‐minute study information sessions delivered by research staff. Participants who subsequently expressed interest were screened via telephone for eligibility.
Participants	Population: from a single workplace (Comcare: the government agency responsible for workplace safety, rehabilitation and compensation for Australian government workplaces) in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia Intervention group: 19 participants Control group: 19 participants Demographics: mean age 42.4 (SD 10.6) years in the intervention group and 42.9 (SD 10.3) years in the control group Women were predominant in the intervention group and men were predominant in the control group. Mean BMI (kg/m²): intervention group 27.5 (SD 6.1); control group 26.2 (SD 4.6)
Interventions	Duration of intervention: 4 weeks Intervention: the intervention communicated 3 key messages: “Stand Up, Sit Less, Move More” and had the following components: organisational (a 45‐minute researcher‐led consultation with unit representatives from the intervention group and management followed by a workshop for all intervention participants); environmental (installation of sit–stand workstations); and individual elements (30‐minute face‐to‐face consultation with each intervention participant, followed by 3 telephone calls (1/week)). Control: no intervention
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement time/tool (units of measurement) Sitting, standing, and moving at the workplace (minutes/8‐h workday) assessed by accelerometer‐inclinometer at baseline and their changes at 3‐month follow‐up Weight (kg), waist circumference (cm), hip circumference (cm), fat free mass (kg), fat mass (kg), fasting blood lipids (mmol/L) and glucose (mmol/L) baseline vs. 3 months Self‐reported health‐ and work‐related outcomes baseline vs. 3 months Musculoskeletal symptoms by anatomical regions Other health symptoms: eye strain, headaches, digestion problems, trouble walking, trouble sleeping, fatigue (1‐5 scale) Work‐related outcomes ≥ 1 sick day (in the last month), > 1 day worked while suffering health problems (in the last month), work performance (1‐10 scale)
Notes	This study was funded by an NHMRC project grant and the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. Ergotron provided the height‐adjustable workstations (www.ergotron.com). No financial disclosures were reported by the authors and the authors declared that there were no conflicts of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	Randomisation was not done.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Allocation into groups was by floor, with intervention participants (primarily administrative staff) working on the floor above the control participants (predominantly senior administrative staff).
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Research staff, participants, and assessors were not blinded to group allocation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	As outcomes were assessed by accelerometer‐inclinometers and self‐administered questionnaires, it is unlikely that results were influenced by the lack of blinding.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	4 participants, 2 each from the intervention and control groups withdrew and 2 further participants, 1 each from the intervention and control groups were lost during follow‐up. As the same proportion of participants were excluded from both groups, the missing data did not have much impact on outcomes.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes mentioned in the methods section were reported. The study protocol was not available.
Baseline comparability/ imbalance	Low risk	There were more women in the intervention group than in the control group. The mean age of both groups was similar. All participants were recruited from a single workplace in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia.
Validity of outcome measure	Low risk	The accelerometer is a valid instrument for the measurement of sitting time.