4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Participatory Approaches in the Context of Research Into Workplace Health Promotion to Improve Physical Activity Levels and Reduce Sedentary Behavior Among Office-Based Workers: Scoping Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Participatory research (PR) involves engaging in cocreation with end users and relevant stakeholders throughout the research process, aiming to distribute power equitably between the end users and research team. Engagement and adherence in previous workplace health promotion (WHP) studies have been shown to be lacking. By implementing a PR approach, the insights of end users and stakeholders are sought in the co-design of feasible and acceptable intervention strategies, thereby increasing the relevance of the research.

          Objective

          This scoping review aims to explore, identify, and map PR techniques and their impact when used in office-based WHP interventions designed to improve physical activity (PA) or reduce sedentary behavior (SB).

          Methods

          The reporting of this scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). A systematic literature search of 5 electronic databases—Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey—was conducted, searching from January 1, 1995, to February 8, 2023. In total, 2 independent reviewers first screened the retrieved articles by title and abstract, and then assessed the full texts based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The search strategy and eligibility criteria were developed and guided by an a priori population (office-based working adults), intervention (a PA WHP intervention that took a PR approach), comparison (no comparison required), and outcome (PA or SB) framework. Data were charted and discussed via a narrative synthesis, and a thematic analysis was conducted. The included studies were evaluated regarding the degree of end user engagement throughout the research process and power shared by the researchers, using Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation.

          Results

          The search retrieved 376 records, of which 8 (2.1%) met the inclusion criteria. Four key strategies were identified: (1) end user focus groups, (2) management involvement, (3) researcher facilitators, and (4) workplace champions. The degree of engagement and power shared was relatively low, with 25% (2/8) of the studies determined to be nonparticipation studies, 25% (2/8) determined to be tokenistic, and 50% (4/8) determined to provide citizen power.

          Conclusions

          This review provides a foundation of evidence on the current practices when taking a PR approach, highlighting that previous office-based PA WHP studies have been largely tokenistic or nonparticipative, and identified that the end user is only engaged with in the conception and implementation of the WHP studies. However, a positive improvement in PA and reduction in SB were observed in the included studies, which were largely attributed to implementing a PR approach and including the end user in the design of the WHP intervention. Future studies should aim to collaborate with workplaces, building capacity and empowering the workforce by providing citizen control and letting the end users “own” the research for a sustainable WHP intervention.

          International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

          RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054402

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

            Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Public Health Surveill
                JMIR Public Health Surveill
                JPH
                JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2369-2960
                2024
                19 June 2024
                : 10
                : e50195
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences Faculty of Education and Health Sciences University of Limerick Limerick Ireland
                [2 ] Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster Health Research Institute University of Limerick Limerick Ireland
                [3 ] University Academy 92 (Old Trafford Campus) Manchester United Kingdom
                [4 ] Public and Patient Involvement Research Unit School of Medicine University of Limerick Limerick Ireland
                [5 ] Public and Patient Involvement Research Unit Health Research Institute University of Limerick Limerick Ireland
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Aidan John Buffey Aidan.Buffey@ 123456ul.ie
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1940-1483
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3572-467X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8350-1481
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6874-0991
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2010-3691
                Article
                v10i1e50195
                10.2196/50195
                11222769
                38896458
                03ad2ec7-9920-4d76-936c-c3f29b155975
                ©Aidan John Buffey, Christina Kate Langley, Brian P Carson, Alan E Donnelly, Jon Salsberg. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 19.06.2024.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://publichealth.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 22 June 2023
                : 4 October 2023
                : 6 December 2023
                : 15 February 2024
                Categories
                Review
                Review

                participatory research approach,workplace health promotion,physical activity,sedentary behavior,end user involvement,office based,desk based,intervention,cocreation,public and patient involvement

                Comments

                Comment on this article