MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401172762 · doi:10.2196/57777

Sustainable Lifestyle Among Office Workers (the SOFIA Study): Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4401172762 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katarina Bälter, ­Abby C. King, Johanna Fritz, Annika Tillander, Oskar Halling Ullberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthPopulationHealth promotionPublic healthIntervention (counseling)Workplace health promotionCluster randomised controlled trialSustainabilityGerontologyMedicineRandomized controlled trialWorkforceBehavior changeNursingEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Society is facing multiple challenges, including lifestyle- and age-related diseases of major public health relevance, and this is of particular importance when the general population, as well as the workforce, is getting older. In addition, we are facing global climate change due to extensive emissions of greenhouse gases and negative environmental effects. A lifestyle that promotes healthy life choices as well as climate and environmentally friendly decisions is considered a sustainable lifestyle. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate if providing information about a sustainable lifestyle encourages individuals to adopt more nutritious dietary habits and increase physical activity, as compared to receiving information solely centered around health-related recommendations for dietary intake and physical activity by the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations and the World Health Organization. Novel features of this study include the use of the workplace as an arena for health promotion, particularly among office workers-a group known to be often sedentary at work and making up 60% of all employees in Sweden. METHODS: The Sustainable Office Intervention (SOFIA) study is a 2-arm, participant-blinded, cluster randomized controlled trial that includes a multilevel sustainable lifestyle arm (intervention arm, n=19) and a healthy lifestyle arm (control arm, n=14). The eligibility criteria were being aged 18-65 years and doing office work ≥20 hours per week. Both intervention arms are embedded in the theoretically based behavioral change wheel method. The intervention study runs for approximately 8 weeks and contains 6 workshops. The study focuses on individual behavior change as well as environmental and policy features at an organizational level to facilitate or hinder a sustainable lifestyle at work. Through implementing a citizen science methodology within the trial, the participants (citizen scientists) collect data using the Stanford Our Voice Discovery Tool app and are involved in analyzing the data, formulating a list of potential actions to bring about feasible changes in the workplace. RESULTS: Participant recruitment and data collection began in August 2022. As of June 2024, a total of 37 participants have been recruited. The results of the pilot phase are expected to be published in 2024 or 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Given the ongoing climate change, negative environmental effects, and the global epidemic of metabolic diseases, a sustainable lifestyle among office workers holds important potential to help in counteracting this trend. Thus, there is an urgent unmet need to test the impact of a sustainable lifestyle on food intake, physical activity, and environmental and climate impacts in a worksite-based randomized controlled trial. This study protocol responds to a societal need by addressing multilevel aspects, including individual behavior changes as well as environmental and organizational changes of importance for the successful implementation of sustainable lifestyle habits in an office setting. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/57777.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.014

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.405 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→