Swartz 2014

Methods	Random allocation by cluster Unblinded Study duration: 6 days Drop outs: 23% Location: USA Recruitment: employees with clerical positions were identified through University directory.
Participants	Population: full time employees (employed >20 yrs) engaged in a sedentary occupation Intervention: stand group: 29 participants step group: 31 participants Demographics: mean age: stand: 42.3 (SD 11.6) years, step: 46.1 (SD 10.5) years 60% were females in stand group and 75% were females in step group BMI: Stand: 29.3 (SD 7.3) kg/m², step: 27.7 (SD 7.4) kg/m²
Interventions	Duration of intervention: 3 days Intervention: computer‐based versus wrist worn prompts
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement time/tool (units of measurement) Total sitting time (minutes/workday), duration of longest sitting bout (minutes/workday), number of sitting bouts/workday of 30 min or more, standing time (minutes/workday), stepping time, sit/stand transitions measured by accelerometer‐inclinometers.
Notes	The Clinical and Translational Science Institute of Southeastern Wisconsin supported this research.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Random number generation was used to assign participants to either the stand group or step group.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Assignments were written out and placed in sealed numbered envelopes.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	The envelopes were opened sequentially by a researcher, participants were informed of group assignment.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Since the measurements for sitting were recorded by accelerometer‐inclinometers, it is unlikely that results were influenced by the lack of blinding.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	18 participants were excluded, 9 each from stand group and step group. Reasons were drop out, equipment malfunction and not wearing monitor properly. The authors did not conduct intention‐to‐treat analysis.
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	No baseline differences were found between the two groups for age, body mass, height or BMI. There was however difference in gender with the Stand group having 60% females and the Step group having 75%.
Validity of outcome measure	Low risk	The accelerometer is a valid instrument for the measurement of sitting time.