Ognibene 2016.

Methods	Study design: cluster‐randomised controlled trial Study duration: 3 months Dropout: 19% Location: USA Recruitment: recruitment details were not specified
Participants	Population: University employees Intervention group: 25 participants, all with baseline pain Control group: 21 participants, all with baseline pain Included criteria: University employees 18 years of age or older who spent at least 6 hours of an 8‐hour day sitting at a computer desk and reported at least a 4/10 level of back pain that had lasted a minimum of 3 months Excluded criteria: physically incapable of standing for at least 10 minutes, already using a sit‐stand workstation Baseline characteristics: appeared to be some minor baseline differences between intervention and control groups ‐ median length of time with low back pain and upper back pain was greater in the intervention group; baseline worst LBP score was greater in the intervention group; more people undergoing treatment(s) in the intervention group than in the control group
Interventions	Intervention Description of intervention: Work‐Fit A or S sit‐stand workstation provided by Ergotron (Ergotron, Saint Paul, MN). No specific instructions on sitting or standing for specific time intervals or durations Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Intensity of intervention: not specified. Participants were encouraged to use the sit‐stand workstation as they felt most comfortable Control Description of intervention: received sit‐stand workstation at the conclusion of the 12‐week active study period Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Intensity of intervention: not stated
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement tool, body region Musculoskeletal pain Modified brief pain inventory from 0 (better) to 10 (worse) at low back and upper back regions Impact of pain on ‐ general activity, walking ability, relationships, ability to sleep, enjoyment of life, ability to concentrate, and ability to exercise Comprehensive Pain Score Physical disability caused by LBP Roland‐Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) from 0 (better) to 24 (worse)
Identification
Notes	Sponsorship source: Ergotron provided sit‐stand computer workstations for study participants
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation	Low risk	Quote: "participants who met eligibility criteria were randomized using block methodology, specifically the ‘‘blockrand’’ package in R (R Version 3.0.0), 29 to either receive a SSW after 2 weeks of baseline surveys (intervention group) or at the conclusion of the 12‐week active period of the study (control group)" Judgement comment: suitable computer programme to provide block randomisation
Allocation concealment	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: it is not stated whether allocation was concealed or who conducted the randomisation
Blinding of participants and personnel	High risk	Judgement comment: participants were not blinded and the study did not state whether any attempts were made to isolate participants from intervention and control groups to mitigate contamination. It would not be possible to blind research personnel
Blinding of outcome assessment	High risk	Judgement comment: as self‐reported musculoskeletal symptoms were the primary outcome measure and participants were not blinded to the intervention, risk of bias is high
Incomplete outcome data	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: it is stated that 11 participants dropped out of the study (19%), but it is unclear whether participants left the study during the course of the study or before the start of the study. Further, no reasons are provided as to why participants withdrew from the study. Analysis appears to have included only those who completed the study
Selective reporting	Low risk	Judgement comment: all outcomes in the protocol described in the trial registry were reported. All measured outcomes appeared to be reported
Baseline imbalance	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: There appeared to be some baseline imbalance with respect to length of time with low back pain. Analyses did not adjust for baseline imbalances. Baseline pain scores were slightly higher in the intervention group