The Effect of Working From Home on Device-Measured Physical Activity Among Japanese White-Collar Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study quantified differences in physical activity between work-from-home (WFH) and work-at-office (WAO) days among Japanese white-collar workers using a within-individual design. METHODS: A total of 177 employees from four Tokyo-based companies wore accelerometers for 8 consecutive days. Paired t tests compared step counts and activity levels by work location, and multivariable regression identified demographic factors related to physical activity reductions during WFH. RESULTS: WFH days showed a 59.2% reduction in step counts (4792 steps/day) and increased sedentary behavior compared to WAO days. Younger employees experienced the largest reductions. Light- and moderate-intensity physical activity decreased by 3.4%, mostly replaced by sedentary time. CONCLUSIONS: WFH resulted in significantly lower step counts compared to WAO in this population of workers in Tokyo. Interventions promoting physical activity during WFH, particularly among younger workers, may mitigate the health risk of inadequate physical activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".