We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

Results: 4

1.
Figure 1

Figure 1. From: Exercise dose and quality of life: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

CONSORT diagram describing recruitment and retention of participants. *Baseline values were carried forward if follow-up QOL scores were missing.

Corby K. Martin, et al. Arch Intern Med. ;169(3):269-278.
2.
Figure 2

Figure 2. From: Exercise dose and quality of life: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

Mean (± SD) baseline SF-36 scores for the DREW sample and the national mean for the United States. The mean QOL scores for the DREW sample differed from the national mean by only 0.02 to 0.22 standard deviation units, which are considered differences of small magnitude 21.

Corby K. Martin, et al. Arch Intern Med. ;169(3):269-278.
3.
Figure 4

Figure 4. From: Exercise dose and quality of life: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

Change in SF-36 scores across the exercise groups was examined for two subgroups of participants: 1) those who lost weight vs. 2) those who maintained or gained weight, using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with baseline age, antidepressant use, employment status, ethnicity, marital status, and smoking status as covariates. Mean change (Least-squares means ± 95% confidence interval) on SF-36 scales across the control and exercise groups for participants who did and did not lose weight are depicted. The results from the ANCOVAs follow: PF, F(3, 416) = 0.12, p=0.95; RP, F(3, 416) = 1.00, p=0.39; BP, F(3, 416) = 1.41, p=0.24; GH, F(3, 416) = 0.28, p=0.84; MH (3, 416) = 0.18, p=0.91; RE, F(3, 416) = 2.41, p=0.07; SF, F(3, 416) = 0.87, p=0.46; and VT, F(3, 416) = 0.11, p=0.95. These non-significant interactions indicate that the pattern of change in each of the SF-36 measures across the exercise groups was similar for those who did and did not lose weight.

Corby K. Martin, et al. Arch Intern Med. ;169(3):269-278.
4.
Figure 3

Figure 3. From: Exercise dose and quality of life: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

Mean change (Least-squares means ± 95% confidence interval) on SF-36 measures across the control and exercise groups. The dose-response relations between exercise dose and change in QOL were evaluated with regression analysis to test for trends in QOL change across groups. Significant trends were found for all QOL scales (all p-values < 0.0001), with exercise dose being an independent predictor of change in PF, t(1) = 3.19, p=0.002; RP, t(1) = 2.62, p=0.009; GH, t(1) = 3.21, p=0.001; MH, t(1) = 2.03, p=0.044; RE, t(1) = 3.00, p=0.003; SF, t(1) = 4.17, p<0.0001; and VT, t(1) = 2.88, p=0.004; but not BP, t(1) = 1.31, p=0.192. Differences in QOL change across groups were tested by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with adjustment for pre-specified covariates (age, antidepressant use, BMI, employment status, ethnicity, marital status, and smoking status at baseline). Significant ANCOVAs (p < .05) were followed by pair-wise comparisons to test if the exercise groups differed significantly from the control group. The alpha level was set a 0.0167 (.05/3=0.0167) and all p-values were multiplied by three; hence, the following notation was used to depict statistical significance: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. For significant comparisons, the LS mean differences (95% confidence intervals) between the 12 KKW and control group follow: PF 5.7 (1.2-10.2), RP 10.4 (1.3-19.5), GH 6.2 (2.1-10.4), MH 3.6 (0.2-7.1), RE 10.4 (2.3-18.4), SF 9.1 (4.1-14.2), and VT 7.1 (1.9-12.2). Similarly, significant LS mean differences (95% CI) between the 4 KKW and control group were: GH 3.9 (0.2-7.6), VT 5.2 (0.5-9.9), SF 4.9 (0.3-9.4), and MH 3.8 (0.7-6.9). The 8 KKW significantly improved SF compared to control 5.4 (0.4-10.4).

Corby K. Martin, et al. Arch Intern Med. ;169(3):269-278.

Supplemental Content

Recent activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...
Write to the Help Desk