Cited by 34Workplace Health and Well-beingOccupational Health and Safety in WorkplacesPhysical Activity and Health

The impact of worksite wellness programs by size of business: A 3-year longitudinal study of participation, health benefits, absenteeism, and presenteeism

Open access
Schwatka, Natalie V, Smith, Derek, Weitzenkamp, David, Atherly, Adam, Dally, Miranda J, Brockbank, Claire V S, Tenney, Liliana, Goetzel, Ron Z +3 more·2018·Annals of Work Exposures and Health

Abstract

Objective: Worksite wellness programs (WWP) may positively impact employee health, medical expenditures, absenteeism, and presenteeism. However, there has been little research to assess the benefits of WWP in small businesses. The purpose of this study is to prospectively evaluate changes in health, absenteeism, and presenteeism for employees who participated in a WWP. Methods: We conducted an observational, 3-year cohort study of 5766 employees from 314 businesses of differing sizes. We followed two cohorts of employees, who completed at least two annual health risk assessments (HRA) between May 2010 and December 2014. Changes from baseline to the first and second follow-up periods were assessed for chronic and non-chronic health conditions, absenteeism, and presenteeism. Results: Small business employees were more likely to participate in the WWP than were employees from large businesses. Changes in chronic and non-chronic health conditions varied by size of business, with small business employees showing improvements in stress, overall health, depression, smoking status, vegetable and fruit consumption, and physical activity, and in their perceptions of job health culture. In contrast, large business employees experienced improvements in stress, vegetable consumption, and alcohol use. No changes in absenteeism or presenteeism were observed. Conclusions: Small businesses achieve higher employee participation rates and more health improvements when compared to employees from large employers. Findings suggest that small businesses may gain the most from a WWP.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/annweh/wxy049

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An investigation of a variety of workplace wellness programs implemented in more than 300 businesses in the US found higher overall employee participation rates in small organizations (<500 employees) than in large organizations (>500 employees).

    “An investigation of a variety of workplace wellness programs implemented in more than 300 businesses in the US found higher overall employee participation rates in small organizations (<500 employees) than in large organizations (>500 employees), perhaps because employee engagement is less administratively complex or more compelling in small networks of employees (16).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schwatka, N. V., Smith, D., Weitzenkamp, D., Atherly, A., Dally, M. J., Brockbank, C. V. S., Tenney, L., Goetzel, R. Z., Jinnett, K., McMillen, J., & Newman, L. S.
Affiliations
  • Colorado School of Public Health (US)
  • Segue Consulting, Denver, CO, USA
  • IBM (United States) (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Pinnacol Assurance, Denver, CO, USA
Corresponding author
Schwatka, Natalie V
Venue
Annals of Work Exposures and Health
Published
2018-09
Volume
62
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
S42-S54
ISSN
  • 2398-7308 (ISSN-L)
  • 2398-7316
OpenAlex
W2891226940
Cited by
34
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
6.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Work Exposures and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Pinnacol Assurance
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
worksite wellness programs, small business, firm size, employee participation, absenteeism, presenteeism, chronic disease, health risk assessment, stress, depression, smoking, physical activity, fruit and vegetable intake, alcohol consumption
MeSH terms
Absenteeism, Presenteeism, Adult, Health Promotion, Health Status, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, United States, Occupational Health, Workplace, Risk Assessment, Young Adult, Small Business

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review