Skip to main content

Table 4 Determinants of energy balance-related behaviours at baseline and post-intervention among girls from intervention and control schools, means (SD)

From: Why did soft drink consumption decrease but screen time not? Mediating mechanisms in a school-based obesity prevention program

  

intervention

 

control

 

n

Baseline

post-

intervention

n

baseline

post-

intervention

screen-viewing behaviour

      

- attitude

232

-0.5 (1.6)

-0.6 (1.9)

173

-0.4 (1.7)

-0.8 (1.9)

- subjective norm

227

-3.9 (3.2)

-3.6 (3.1)

175

-3.2 (3.2)

-3.2 (3.6)

- perceived control

232

-0.4 (4.3)

-0.5 (4.7)

173

-1.3 (4.6)

-1.7 (4.5)

- habit

241

0.8 (2.7)

0.8 (3.0)

179

1.1 (2.5)

1.3 (2.7)

active transport to school

      

- attitude

222

2.7 (2.3)

3.1 (2.7)

172

2.7 (2.2)

3.0 (2.7)

- subjective norm

237

-2.8 (3.2)

-2.6 (3.0)

179

-2.5 (3.1)

-3.0 (3.2)

- perceived control

234

2.7 (3.2)

2.4 (3.8)

180

2.7 (3.3)

2.4 (3.6)

- habit

240

2.0 (2.1)

1.9 (2.4)

182

1.9 (2.1)

2.0 (2.1)

- perceived environment

240

0.1 (1.4)

0.2 (1.5)

183

-0.04 (1.2)

0.07 (1.3)

sugar-containing

beverage consumption

      

- attitude

206

1.4 (2.3)

1.6 (2.8)

175

1.2 (2.3)

1.4 (2.5)

- subjective norm

202

-3.6 (2.9)

-4.3 (3.3)

172

-3.7 (3.2)

-4.2 (3.4)

- perceived control

206

1.9 (4.3)

1.6 (4.6)

173

1.7 (4.6)*

1.7 (4.6)

- habit

210

0.3 (2.6)

-0.2 (2.9)

171

0.3 (2.7)

0.2 (2.6)

high caloric snack consumption

consumption

      

- attitude

230

1.9 (2.1)

1.9 (2.4)

172

1.8 (2.0)

2.0 (2.6)

- subjective norm

221

-2.9 (3.2)

-2.6 (3.2)

175

-2.8 (3.4)

-2.8 (3.2)

- perceived control

233

1.8 (4.0)

1.4 (4.0)

180

1.7 (3.3)

1.3 (3.8)

- habit

237

-0.2 (2.6)

-0.03 (2.6)

180

-0.3 (2.2)

-0.2 (2.4)

  1. * significantly different from the control group (p = 0.05)