Cited by 351Physical Activity and HealthErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The association between sedentary behaviour and risk of anxiety: a systematic review

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous research has linked sedentary behaviour (SB) to adverse physical health outcomes in adults and youth. Although evidence for the relationship between SB and mental health outcomes (e.g., depression) is emerging, little is known regarding risk of anxiety. METHODS: A systematic search for original research investigating the association between SB and risk of anxiety was performed using numerous electronic databases. A total of nine observational studies (seven cross-sectional and two longitudinal) were identified. Methodological quality of studies was assessed and a best-evidence synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: One cross-sectional study demonstrated a strong methodological quality, five cross-sectional studies demonstrated a moderate methodological quality and three studies (two cross-sectional one longitudinal) received a weak methodological quality rating. Overall, there was moderate evidence for a positive relationship between total SB and anxiety risk as well as for a positive relationship between sitting time and anxiety risk. There was inconsistent evidence for the relationship between screen time, television viewing time, computer use, and anxiety risk. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence is available on the association between SB and risk of anxiety. However, our findings suggest a positive association (i.e. anxiety risk increases as SB time increases) may exist (particularly between sitting time and risk of anxiety). Further high-quality longitudinal/interventional research is needed to confirm findings and determine the direction of these relationships.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/s12889-015-1843-x

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Flow of study selection through the phases of the review
Fig. 1 Flow of study selection through the phases of the reviewCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Canberra: ABS.: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2008.
  2. World Health Organisation. Global Health Estimates summary tables, DALYs by cause, age and sex. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation; 2013. World2011.
  3. Taintor Z, Rosenthal RN. Microprocessor abuse and internet addiction. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.
  4. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Hamilton, ON: McMaster University; 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 350

Metadata

Authors
Teychenne, M., Costigan, S. A., & Parker, K.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Teychenne, Megan
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2015-06-19
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
513-513
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1943532712
Cited by
351
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 2
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
sedentary behavior, anxiety, sitting time, screen time, television viewing, computer use, mental health, physical inactivity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Humans, Male, Risk Assessment, 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