Graves 2015.

Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Study duration: 8 weeks Dropout: 4% Location: UK Recruitment: consent was sought from 11 departmental managers for employee recruitment. All employees in consenting departments received an overview of the study and a participant information sheet, and all were invited to a study information session via an email from the research team
Participants	Population: office workers from 1 organisation (Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK). Employees within the approached departments were predominantly administrative staff Intervention group: 26 participants (total) with 16 to 18 participants with baseline pain Control group: 21 participants (total) with 9 to 15 participants with baseline pain Included criteria: office workers from 1 organisation (predominantly administrative staff from a university). Full‐time members of staff with access to a work telephone or a desktop computer were included Excluded criteria: cardiovascular or metabolic disease, taking medication, pregnant, planning absence > 1 week during the trial Baseline characteristics: baseline group differences were not statistically tested for. However, some differences were noted, such as more females and participants with a tertiary education in the intervention group compared to the control group
Interventions	Intervention Description of intervention: installation of a sit‐stand workstation, face‐to‐face training, ergonomic information, a web‐link with ergonomic guidelines Duration of intervention: 8 weeks Intensity of intervention: participants were not prescribed the length of time to use the sit‐stand workstation; participants were given training by the company that supplied the sit‐stand workstation and a link to guidelines Control Description of intervention: maintained normal work duties; offered sit‐stand workstation at completion of the intervention period Duration of intervention: 8 weeks Intensity of intervention: not stated
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement tool, body region Musculoskeletal pain on a Likert scale from 0 (no discomfort) to 10 (extremely uncomfortable) at 3 sites ‐ lower back, upper back, neck and shoulder Sitting, standing, and walking using EMA diary entries Vascular outcomes measured by flow‐mediated dilation, carotid artery intima media thickness Plasma glucose, triglycerides, and total cholesterol measured by fasting blood sampling BMI measured by standardised weight and height measurements Sociodemographic characteristics, work‐related and office environment characteristics measured by self‐report questionnaire
Identification
Notes	Sponsorship source: Ergotron Ltd (www.ergotron.com) provided sit‐stand workstations for the present study. Ergotron had no involvement or influence on the provenance, commissioning, conduct, or findings of the study. No other financial disclosures were reported by the authors of this paper
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: following baseline assessments, participants were assigned by a member of the research team to a treatment arm using a randomised block design and a random numbers table. Departments served as blocks, and participants within departments were randomly assigned at the individual level. Assignment of individual participants within each department alternated between arms. Although the overall randomisation procedure was low risk, as only a select group of participants with baseline pain were included in the review, randomisation was compromised
Allocation concealment	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: although it states that 1 member of the research team performed the randomisation, it is not stated whether there was allocation concealment
Blinding of participants and personnel	High risk	Judgement comment: it appears that within each department, some participants were using the sit‐stand workstations and others were not, so blinding of participants and personnel was not possible
Blinding of outcome assessment	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: in this study, musculoskeletal outcomes were a secondary outcome, so it is unclear whether the fact that participants were not blinded to the intervention would contribute to bias in self‐reporting of musculoskeletal outcomes
Incomplete outcome data	Low risk	Judgement comment: 47 participants were randomised; 46 completed the intervention (25 intervention; 21 control), and all participants who provided data for musculoskeletal outcomes completed the study
Selective reporting	Low risk	Judgement comment: outcomes reported are consistent with clinical trial registration
Baseline imbalance	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: gender imbalance between groups was noted. No adjustments were made in the analyses