Li 2017

Methods	Random allocation Single‐blind Study duration: 5 weeks Dropout: 18% Location: Australia Recruitment: employees were invited to participate through internal email communication.
Participants	Population: employees from the Health Promotion Unit (HPU) of a local health district in the Sydney metropolitan region. Control group: Group 1 (10 participants) Intervention group: Group 2 with 8 participants, Group 3 with 7 participants, Group 4 with 7 participants Demographics: BMI: intervention group 22.6 (SD 2.6) kg/m², control group 21.5 (SD 2.6) kg/m²
Interventions	Duration: 4 weeks Control: Group 1 usual seated work Intervention: sit‐stand desk: Group 2 alternated between 40 minutes sitting and 20 minutes standing, Group 3 alternated between 30 minutes sitting and 30 minutes standing, Group 4 alternated between 20 minutes sitting and 40 minutes standing; in addition all intervention group received email reminders
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement time/tool (units of measurement) Objectively measured total sitting, standing and stepping/walking time, and sit‐to‐stand (STS) transitions during work and non‐work hours assessed by an activPAL accelerometer‐inclinometer and self‐reported using Occupational sitting and physical activity questionnaire and The Active Australia Survey (AAS) Self‐reported leisure time physical activity (LTPA) Sleep duration
Notes	Authors reported no conflict of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Participants were assigned identification codes that were randomised using permuted blocks with block size 8 and 4.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Group allocation sequence was generated by a study investigator who was not involved in data analysis.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Blinding participants or all members of the research team to group allocation was not possible due to the nature of the trial.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The researcher conducting the data analysis was blinded to the group allocation of participants until analyses were completed.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	7 participants in intervention and 1 in control group lost to follow‐up (25% attrition rate).
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	All outcomes mentioned in the study protocol were not reported.
Baseline comparability/ imbalance	Low risk	Intervention and control group were comparable for age, sex and BMI at baseline.
Validity of outcome measure	Low risk	activPal accelerometer is a valid instrument for assessing physical activity and sedentary behaviour