Cited by 166Physical Activity and HealthCoffee research and impactsErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders

Prolonged sitting: is it a distinct coronary heart disease risk factor?

Dunstan, David W., Thorp, Alicia A., Healy, Genevieve N.·2011·Current Opinion in Cardiology

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prolonged sitting (sedentary behavior) has deleterious cardiovascular and metabolic correlates; however, little is known about the associations of too much sitting with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk. In addition to the adverse effects of total sitting time, the manner in which it is accumulated has also been postulated to be important for cardiovascular health. RECENT FINDINGS: We describe recent evidence from several research papers published in the last 12-18 months, showing deleterious relationships of sedentary behavior with mortality outcomes. We also explore emerging findings on breaking up sedentary time and its potential beneficial impact on cardiovascular health. SUMMARY: Consistent independent associations have been observed between sitting time/sedentary behaviors and elevated all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality risk. Generally, these associations have persisted following adjustment for physical activity. Furthermore, total sedentary time (measured objectively via accelerometer) is detrimentally associated with several cardiovascular risk factors, whereas breaking up sedentary time (independent of total sedentary time and moderate-to-vigorous intensity activity) is beneficially associated. This evidence provides further support to the importance of avoiding prolonged, uninterrupted periods of sitting time for cardiovascular health. However, further evidence from intervention trials is required to establish the causal pathways.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/hco.0b013e3283496605

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dunstan, D. W., Thorp, A. A., & Healy, G. N.
Affiliations
Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Dunstan, David W.
Venue
Current Opinion in Cardiology
Published
2011-09
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
412-419
ISSN
0268-4705 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2010126073
Cited by
166
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 8
FWCI
1.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Heart Foundation of Australia
  • Australian Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Keywords
sedentary behavior, prolonged sitting, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular risk factors, physical activity, cardiovascular health
MeSH terms
Coronary Disease, Humans, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Sedentary Behavior

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