TABLE 1

Intervention Effects on BMI and BSR

Study 1 (n = 40)Study 2 (n = 146)
Mean (SD) or %bModel-based inferenceaMean (SD) or %bModel-based inferencea
Not adjusted for baseline BSRAdjusted for baseline BSRNot adjusted for baseline BSRAdjusted for baseline BSR
Intrv
N = 19Ctrl
N = 21Effectc (95%CI)PEffecta (95%CI)PIntrv
N = 106Ctrl
N = 40Effectc (95%CI)PEffecta (95%CI)P
BMI z0.61
(1.23)1.34
(1.12)−0.79
(–1.57, 0.003).05–0.47
(–1.22, 0.28).220.66
(0.98)1.17
(1.04)–0.53
(–0.91, –0.16).006–0.31
(–0.62, –0.0007).05
BSR4.68
(2.02)6.05
(1.64)−1.42
(–2.64, –0.21).02–0.95
(–2.13, 0.23).114.55
(0.97)5.30
(1.12)–0.75
(–1.16, –.34)<.001–0.56
(–0.93, –0.19).003
BMI ≥9521%39%0.40
(0.08, 2.01).270.74
(0.10, 5.26).7624%54%0.27
(0.11, 0.63).0020.34
(0.11, 1.04).06
BSR ≥622%54%0.24
(0.05, 1.15).070.35
(0.06, 1.88).2215%49%0.18
(0.07, 0.45)<.0010.19
(0.07, 0.53).002
  • Baseline values for BSR were as follows: Study 1: intervention M = 4.83 (0.74), control M = 5.35 (1.20); Study 2: intervention M = 4.37 (1.23), control M = 4.86 (0.85). Baseline values for BSR ≥6 were as follows: Study 1: 16.7% of intervention, 38.1% of control; Study 2: 13.0% of intervention, 13.2% of control. P values for all contrasts >.05. CI, confidence interval; Ctrl, control; Intrv, intervention.

  • a Analyses in Study 1 controlled for pubertal development and child age at follow-up (due to the broad range) and analyses in Study 2 took into account the hierarchical nature of the data (ie, participants were nested within schools). In Study 2, the intervention-by-gender interaction was nonsignificant for BMI and BSR (P’s > .50).

  • b Means and SDs for the continuous variables (BMI and BSR); percent obese for the indicator variables (BMI ≥95% and BSR ≥6).

  • c For the continuous variables, intervention effect is the difference between the means for the 2 groups (intervention minus control); for the indicator variables, intervention effect is the odds ratio for obesity (intervention versus control).