Two years of school-based intervention program could improve the physical fitness among Ecuadorian adolescents at health risk: subgroups analysis from a cluster-randomized trial

Table 4 Effect of the intervention according to BMI status

	All	Control	Intervention	Adjusted		Unadjusted
	n	Mean (DS)	Mean (DS)	β [95 % CI]	P ^b	β [95 % CI]	P ^d
Fitness (EUROFIT)
Speed-agility
Speed shuttle run (s)					0.06^c		0.08^e
Normal weight	723	2.65 (3.37)	1.96 (2.41)	−0.35 [−1.63; 0.93]	0.59	−0.58 [−1.45; 0.28]	0.19
Underweight	60	2.72 (3.79)	2.61 (1.93)	−1.66 [−6.31; 2.97]	0.48	−0.20 [−1.91; 1.52]	0.82
Overweight^a	188	2.85 (3.71)	1.34 (2.40)	−1.85 [−3.62; −0.08]	0.04	−1.51 [−2.59; −0.43]	0.006
Muscle strength and endurance
Vertical jump (cm)		987	0.07 (6.45)	1.98 (6.80)		0.59^c	0.85^e
Accelerometer data
% who meet the PA recommendation (60 min MVPA/day)		130	−18.09	−5.87		0.46	0.57

^aThe overweight group includes the obese adolescents
^bP-value adjusted for gender, socio economic status, fitness and all interaction terms between covariates and allocation group
^cP-value of interactions terms of BMI status (normal weight, underweight and overweight) X allocation group (control/intervention) after adjusting for gender, socio economic status, fitness and including all interactions between covariates and allocation group
^dP-value of the unadjusted analysis
^eP-value of the interaction term between BMI status (normal weight, underweight and overweight) X allocation group (control/intervention) from unadjusted analysis

ISSN: 1471-2431