Skip to main content

Table 6 The intervention effect on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscle strength stratified by study arm and gender. The results are presented as mean differences in change (intervention arms vs controls) with 95% CI, P-values and ICC for school

From: The effect of a school-based intervention on physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness and muscle strength: the School in Motion cluster randomized trial

  n Mean difference in change (95% CI)a P ICC
Girls
PAL-intervention
 Cardiorespiratory fitness (m) 656 3.2 (−10.3, 16.8) 0.643 0.16
 Handgrip (kg) 698 −1.8 (−2.5, − 1.1) < 0.001 0.24
 Standing broad jump (cm) 693 2.5 (0.1, 4.8) 0.036 0.04
 Sit-ups (n) 695 0.4 (−0.1, 1.0) 0.071 0.01
DWBH-intervention
 Cardiorespiratory fitness (m) 612 −24.6 (−39.8, −9.3) 0.002 0.16
 Handgrip (kg) 648 −0.8 (−1.5, − 0.1) 0.039 0.24
 Standing broad jump (cm) 644 −1.1 (−3.7, 1.4) 0.380 0.04
 Sit-ups (n) 641 −0.2 (0.8, 0.3) 0.459 0.01
Boys
PAL-intervention
 Cardiorespiratory fitness (m) 677 36.7 (24.0, 49.3) < 0.001 0.09
 Handgrip (kg) 723 −0.1 (−1.0, 0.7) 0.778 0.11
 Standing broad jump (cm) 720 1.3 (−1.7, 4.4) 0.401 < 0.01
 Sit-ups (n) 720 0.6 (0.1, 1.2) 0.040 0.07
DWBH-intervention
 Cardiorespiratory fitness (m) 654 1.4 (−12.6, 15.5) 0.842 0.09
 Handgrip (kg) 697 −0.5 (−1.4, 0.3) 0.236 0.11
 Standing broad jump (cm) 689 1.2 (−2.0, 4.4) 0.464 < 0.01
 Sit-ups (n) 689 0.1 (−0.6, 0.6) 0.913 0.07
  1. PAL Physically active learning; DWBH Don’t worry – Be happy; ICC Intraclass correlation coefficient,
  2. aEach model contained fixed effects for intervention, time (baseline – follow-up) and intervention x time interaction, in addition to random effects for school, class and subject ID.,