Comparison of sedentary behaviours among rural men working in offices and on farms

Pontt, Johanna L.; Rowlands, Alex V.; Dollman, James

doi:10.1111/ajr.12143

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there is not a consensus regarding the daily cut-off values of sedentary time associated with increased mortality and disease incidence, a study published in 2018 with a meta-regression including more than one million participants suggests that nine hours per day or more of sedentary behaviour is associated with increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio = 1.22) in adults [39]. Our meta-analysis including two studies [32,35] that assessed sedentary time with accelerometers, found that the average sedentary time per day was 7.8 hours among the rural population. Similar results were found in a study that included data from 10 countries with populations from city-regions, which concluded that the average sedentary time per day, assessed through accelerometry, was 8.5 hours [40].…”

Section: Prevalence Of Sedentary Behaviour In Australian Adultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…The age range across the included studies was 18 to 93 years old, with seven studies including only women in their samples (Table 1). A total of 15 studies (54%) assessed physical activity subjectively with the Active Australia Survey or the long form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-L) [8,11,[13][14][15][16][17]19,21,23,[25][26][27][28][29], meanwhile only three studies (11%) reported measures using accelerometers [28,32,35]. Seven studies (25%) that assessed either physical activity or sedentary behaviour using a non-specified questionnaire or a questionnaire other than the Active Australia Survey or IPAQ were published up to 2010.…”

Section: Viewpoints Papersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are people in the bush really physically active? A systematic review and meta-analysis of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in rural Australians populations

Castrillon¹,

Beckenkamp²,

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Journal of Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are people in the bush really physically active? A systematic review and meta-analysis of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in rural Australians populations Background Physical inactivity is a major risk factor for non-communicable disease and premature mortality. People who live in rural settings are usually regarded as more physically active than those living in urban areas, however, direct comparisons between these populations are scarce. We aimed to summarise the prevalence of physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour in rural settings in Australia, compared to urban counterparts. MethodsWe searched six databases (AMED, Embase, Medline; CINAHL, SPORTDiscus; and RURAL) and identified 28 observational studies that investigated the levels of physical inactivity and/or sedentary behaviour in adults aged 18 years and over in rural Australia. Random effects meta-analysis was used to generate pooled prevalence estimates. ResultsPhysical inactivity was four percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.4 to 8) higher in rural populations compared to urban populations. There was a one percentage point (95% CI = -3 to 5) prevalence difference of physical activity in the rural populations. Rural populations reported on average 7.8 hours of sedentary time per day (95% CI = 5 to 10) and the prevalence of high levels of sedentary behaviour (≥to 8 hours per day) was 7% (95% CI = -8 to -7) greater in urban areas compared to rural areas.Conclusions People living in rural areas are just as physically inactive as people who live in urban areas. Our findings challenge the popular views that rural lifestyles result in people engaging more frequently in physical activity. Public health campaigns promoting physical activity in rural settings are just as necessary as in urban settings. Electronic supplementary material:The online version of this article contains supplementary material.

show abstract

Section: Prevalence Of Sedentary Behaviour In Australian Adultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Viewpoints Papersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are people in the bush really physically active? A systematic review and meta-analysis of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in rural Australians populations

Castrillon¹,

Beckenkamp²,

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Journal of Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Urbanization and technological advances in the workplace have been reported to be associated with a significant proportion of the decline in physical activities, particularly occupational physical activities [ 26 , 27 ]. Additionally, it has been suggested that mechanization in the agricultural sector may lead to increased sedentary behaviors among farmers [ 28 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Physical Activity Patterns among Rural Chinese Adults: Data from China National Nutrition and Health Survey in 2010–2012

Ding

Song

Yuan

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China has experienced a rapid increase in non-communicable diseases (NCDs), especially in rural China. In addition to a dramatic increase in energy intake, the decrease in physical activity (PA) may be a reason. The study described the patterns and factors of physical activity and sedentary behaviors of 70,038 adults in rural China, based on data from the Chinese Nutrition and Health Survey (CNNHS) in 2010–2012. The mean working time of the employed subjects was 6.04 ± 1.3 day/week, 8.38 ± 2.2 h/day, of which 3.37 ± 2.8 h was sitting time. The occupational PA intensity was significantly relevant with occupation. The average transportation time of the rural Chinese adults was 57.9 ± 45.4 min, and 60.0% took the active transportation mode. The leisure-time PA (LTPA) participation rate was 3.8%, the LTPA time of those who had LTPA was 234.9 ± 231.3 min/week, lower participation was found in farmers and those in younger age groups, and those with lower educational and economic levels. The average domestic PA time, sedentary leisure-time, and sleeping time was 93.0 ± 72.7 min, 2.5 ± 1.4 h, and 7.9 ± 1.1 h, respectively. PA programs should be implemented in rural China, and the PA guidelines for farmers should be developed separately for the farming and non-farming seasons.

show abstract

“…sedentary time) was calculated by summing up the duration of sitting/lying times within wake time epochs (also, the time of self-reported daytime naps were deducted, if exists). Participants with at least three valid weekdays of activPAL data (Pontt, Rowlands, & Dollman, 2015) and fulfilled GPAQ and SBQ, were included in the further analysis.…”

Section: Data Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Self-Reported Sedentary Time on Weekdays with an Objective Measure (activPAL)

Kastelic

Šarabon

2019

Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-reports are commonly used tools for obtaining sedentary behaviors. The aim of our study was to assess agreement between two self-reports of sedentary time and a gold standard sedentary time objective monitor. A worksite sample (n = 42) completed the Slovenian version of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ), the Slovenian version of the Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (SBQ for weekdays) and wore an objective physical activity monitor (activPAL) for up to five consecutive working days. Results revealed that GPAQ and SBQ consistently underestimated the total sedentary time, with the mean bias of −165 min/day and −181 min/day, respectably. Wide limits of agreement showed poor precision and intraclass correlation revealed a low level of agreement. GPAQ and SBQ are not recommended to be used in studies seeking for relationships with health outcomes, nor in studies where detecting the behavioral change is of interest. Objective measurement should be the preferred choice when possible.

show abstract

Comparison of sedentary behaviours among rural men working in offices and on farms

Abstract: In this study, farmers were less sedentary than rural men of similar age who work in offices. Further research is needed to identify reasons for the particularly high prevalence of chronic disease in Australian farmers.

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Are people in the bush really physically active? A systematic review and meta-analysis of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in rural Australians populations

Are people in the bush really physically active? A systematic review and meta-analysis of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in rural Australians populations

The Physical Activity Patterns among Rural Chinese Adults: Data from China National Nutrition and Health Survey in 2010–2012

Comparison of Self-Reported Sedentary Time on Weekdays with an Objective Measure (activPAL)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About