Skip to main content

Table 5 The impact of Walking Netball on markers on psychosocial health, physical activity behaviour and quality of life

From: Is walking netball an effective, acceptable and feasible method to increase physical activity and improve health in middle- to older age women?: A RE-AIM evaluation

 

ICC

Intercept (PB)

Baseline

3-months

6-months

12-months

Age

SES

Random Slope

Mental health and wellbeing

Null model b(se)

.76

53.54(.42)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

52.94(.49)*

.16(.28)

1.15(.28)*

.96(.37)*

.87(.44)*

−.05(.05)

.71(.32)*

2.31(.28)*

Loneliness

Null model b(se)

.83

1.93(.02)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

1.95*(.03)*

−.011(.014)

−.025(.017)

−.018(.02)

−.045(.02)*

.002(.003)

−.045(.021)

.008(.001)*

QOL: physical function

Null model b(se)

.63

2.40(.04)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.45(.05)*

.04(.03)

−.10(.04)*

−.08(.05)

−.011(.06)*

.00(.00)

−.10(.03)*

.04(.00)*

QOL: feelings

Null model b(se)

.70

2.14(.05)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.18(.06)*

−.03(.04)

−.098(.04)*

−.01(.05)

−.02(.06)

.00(.00)

−.11(.03)*

.04(.00)*

QOL: daily activities

Null model b(se)

.61

1.53(.03)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

1.55(.04)*

−.01(.06)

−.06(.03)

−.02(.04)

−.01(.05)

.00(.00)

−.05(.02)

.03(.00)*

QOL: social activities

Null model b(se)

.64

1.39(.03)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

1.36(.04)*

−.00(.03)

.00(.03)

.09(.04)*

−.02(.02)

.00(.00)

−.02(.00)

.02(.00)*

QOL: pain

Null model b(se)

.74

2.16(.05)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.19(.06)*

.00(.03)

−.08(.04)*

−.08(.05)

.04(.06)

.00(.00)

−.10(.03)*

.04(.00)*

QOL: changes in health status

Null model b(se)

.40

2.82(.02)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.79(.04)*

.03(.03)

−.01(.03)

.03(.04)

.07(.05)

.00(.00)

.00(.00)

.03(.00)*

QOL: health status

Null model b(se)

.75

2.45(.04)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.49(.05)*

−.01(.03)

−.05(.03)

−.05(.03)

−.05(.04)

−.00(.00)

−.03(.03)

.02(.00)*

QOL: social support

Null model b(se)

.73

1.70(.05)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

1.78(.05)*

.00(.03)

−.04(.04)

−.04(.04)

−.00(.05)

.00(.00)

−.13(.03)*

.02(.00)*

QOL: overall

Null model b(se)

.78

2.07(.02)*

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2.09(.03)*

.00(.01)

−.05(.02)*

−.01(.02)

−.00(.02)

.00(.00)

−.07(.02)*

.00(.00)*

MET physical activity per-week

Null model b(se)

.61

2688.3(115.0)

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Random intercept and slope b(se)

–

2547.0(147.8)

56.3(106.0)

188.3(118.0)*

29.9(135.8)

298.6(157.3)*

12.1(13.9)

−40.3(86.3)

226,934.13(35,275.5)*

  1. Note: Note: PB (pre-baseline), b (regression coefficient), se (standard error), QOL (quality of life), ICC (Interclass correlation coefficient), * = p = <.05, MET (metabolic equivalent of task)
Back to article page

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

Contact us