Many sedentary interventions until now have been limited by short durations.
Until now, only a handful of sedentary interventions have been conducted in the worksite.
While many early worksite sedentary interventions did not demonstrate effectiveness, 17 recent trials have shown promise for reducing sitting time.
Secondary outcomes include objectively assessed physical activity and sedentary behaviour, intervention compliance, functional walking capacity, participation in domestic activities, muscle strength, body composition, psychosocial outcomes, quality of life and health care costs.
This review will include studies that compare a physical activity and/or a sedentary behaviour intervention that contains at least one BCT to any of the following controls: passive control group (eg, usual care, waiting list control, no treatment) or active control group (eg, alternative cognitive or behavioural approaches).
Therefore, adolescent girls are a potentially important target group for future sedentary behavior interventions.
It is therefore important to find out whether the other BCTs included in this enhanced taxonomy are used and effective in physical activity and/or sedentary behaviour interventions.
More sedentary focused interventions are needed to examine whether reducing sedentary time can be sustained in the long term and whether long-term changes result in significant reductions in risk for chronic diseases.
To date, no review of physical activity or sedentary behaviour interventions has focused exclusively on inactive populations, RCTs or coded BCTs exhaustively using the most recent BCT taxonomy v1.
Since previous systematic reviews of physical activity and sedentary behaviour interventions have been published, 16 26 the list of BCTs that can be investigated has become broader and more nuanced.
