Parry 2015.

Methods	Study design: cluster‐randomised controlled trial Study duration: 3 months Dropout: 50% in primary study; unclear how many with baseline pain dropped out Location: Australia Recruitment: recruitment meetings were held at suburban branches of 3 large government organisations
Participants	Population: office workers (clerical, data entry, and call centre workers) from 3 government organisations in Perth, Western Australia Intervention group: 1 to 18 with baseline pain Control group: 1 to 11 with baseline pain Included criteria: office workers (clerical, call centre, and data processing) from 3 large government organisations Excluded criteria: inability to wear an accelerometer due to disability, wheelchair bound Baseline characteristics: information related to participants with baseline pain was not available
Interventions	Intervention Active office Description of intervention: group A 'active office' ('active/treadmill workstation' and promotion of incidental office activity) Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Intensity of intervention: not described Traditional physical activity Description of intervention: group B 'traditional physical activity' pedometer challenge to increase activity between productive work times Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Intensity of intervention: not described Control Description of intervention: 'office ergonomics' ‐ computer workstation design and breaking up computer tasks Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Intensity of intervention: not described
Outcomes	Outcome name, measurement tool, body region Musculoskeletal pain/discomfort ‐ dichotomous (yes/no) at 8 sites ‐ lower back, upper back, neck, shoulder, elbow, hip, knee, and ankle/foot Physical activity and sedentary time measured with Actigraph accelerometer
Identification
Notes	Sponsorship source: 1 study author was supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship Comments: this is an analysis of secondary outcomes from a larger study examining workplace interventions to reduce sedentary time and promote light and moderate/vigorous physical activity. Full details of the study can be found at the following source: Parry S, Straker L, Gilson ND, Smith AJ (2013). Participatory workplace interventions can reduce sedentary time for office workers ‐ a randomised controlled trial. PLoS ONE 8(11), e78957
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation	Unclear risk	Quote: "self‐reported musculoskeletal symptoms. Methods: a randomised controlled trial was conducted with office workers (clerical, call centre and data processing; n = 63, aged 35–59 years) from three large government organisations in Perth, Australia. Three intervention groups were developed" Judgement comment: further description of the randomisation process was provided in the primary paper related to this smaller secondary analysis conference presentation. Randomisation is described as follows: "a parallel arms clustered randomised control" (Parry et al, 2013). Further, "simple randomisation with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio was used by drawing a sealed envelope containing allocation from a hat" (Parry et al, 2013). 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	Low risk	Judgement comment: primary paper for this study states: "simple randomisation with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio was used by drawing a sealed envelope containing allocation from a hat" (Parry et al, 2013)
Blinding of participants and personnel	High risk	Judgement comment: no information on blinding is provided. It is likely though that participants and researchers were aware of the allocation
Blinding of outcome assessment	High risk	Judgement comment: primary paper states: "the researcher with primary responsibility for collection and analysis of accelerometer data (SP) had conducted the interventions and was not blinded to group allocation" (Parry et al, 2013). In addition, for 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	High risk	Judgement comment: from the primary paper, 133 participants were randomised, but only 63 participants completed the study. Incompleteness of data for some outcomes was considerable (e.g. with only 5, 10, and 6 participants in the analysis of hip, knee, and ankle, respectively)
Selective reporting	Low risk	Judgement comment: this current study reported only 1 outcome from a larger registered trial. The pain outcome was listed as an outcome in the trial registry
Baseline imbalance	High risk	Judgement comment: differences in baseline symptoms for some body regions (e.g. neck) were considerable

BMI: body mass index.

BREF: generic quality of life scale developed by WHO.

CBA: controlled before‐and‐after.

EMA: ecological momentary assessment.

LBP: low back pain.

MVPA: moderate to vigorous physical activity.

ODI: Oswestry Disability Index.

RMDQ: Roland Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire.

VAS: visual analog scale.