Cited by 134Workplace Health and Well-beingPhysical Activity and HealthBehavioral Health and Interventions

Efficacy of an E-Mail Intervention for the Promotion of Physical Activity and Nutrition Behavior in the Workplace Context

Plotnikoff, Ronald C., McCargar, Linda J., Wilson, Philip M., Loucaides, Constantinos A.·2005·American Journal of Health Promotion

Abstract

Purpose.: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a 12-week workplace e-mail intervention designed to promote physical activity and nutrition behavior. Design.: A pre- and post-test design was conducted to compare the effects of e-mail messages between intervention and control groups. Setting.: Five large workplaces in Alberta, Canada. Subjects.: Employees with access to a personal e-mail address (N = 2121) were randomly assigned to an intervention (n = 1566) or a control group (n = 555). Intervention.: Physical activity and nutrition messages were based on social-cognitive theories. The intervention group received one physical activity and one parallel nutrition message per week for 12 weeks. The control group received no weekly messages. Measures.: Each participant completed self-report measures of physical activity and nutrition related to knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors 1 week before (time 1) and 1 week after (time 2) the intervention. Results.: The intervention group was more efficacious at time 2 on measures of self-efficacy, pros, cons, intentions, and behavior related to physical activity. This group also reported more favorable changes in practicing healthy eating, balancing food intake with activity level, cooking meals with techniques to reduce fat, and avoiding eating high-fat foods. Effect sizes for all significant differences were small. Conclusion.: E-mail is a promising mode of delivery for promoting physical activity and nutrition in the workplace. Further theoretically driven studies are needed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4278/0890-1171-19.6.422

Cites

41 of 41 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
Plotnikoff, R. C., McCargar, L. J., Wilson, P. M., & Loucaides, C. A.
Affiliations
University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Plotnikoff, Ronald C.
Venue
American Journal of Health Promotion
Published
2005-07
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
422-429
ISSN
  • 0890-1171 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-6602
OpenAlex
W2176596719
Cited by
134
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 13
FWCI
20.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Health Promotion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Nutrition and Health
  • Health Canada
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
workplace health promotion, physical activity, nutrition behavior, healthy eating, social cognitive theory, self-efficacy, health behavior change, fat loss, employee health
MeSH terms
Adult, Alberta, Female, Health Benefit Plans, Employee, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Program Evaluation, Exercise, Workplace, Electronic Mail, Nutritional Sciences

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