Skip to main content

Table 2 Per protocol analysis

From: The effects on self-efficacy, motivation and perceived barriers of an intervention targeting physical activity and sedentary behaviours in office workers: a cluster randomized control trial

 

iPA

iSED

C

iPA vs C

iSED vs C

iSED vs iPA

Baseline mean (SD)

Post-test mean (SD)

Baseline mean (SD)

Post-test mean (SD)

Baseline mean (SD)

Post-test mean (SD)

95% Credible interval

Self-efficacya

n = 48

n = 28

n = 61

   

Self-efficacy PA

27.3 (8.2)

30.4 (7.1)

29.1 (7.1)

31.2 (6.9)

28.3 (7.5)

28.5 (7.6)

3.19 (0.53 to 5.89)*

2.55 (−0.53 to 5.68)

−0.65 (−3.78 to 2.36)

Self-efficacy SED

26.8 (7.8)

27.4 (7.8)

27.7 (7.2)

29.9 (7.0)

26.7 (7.2)

25.4 (7.8)

3.59 (0.35 to 7.15)*

4.57 (0.77 to 8.60)*

0.98 (−2.93 to 4.74)

Motivation PAa

n = 44

n = 26

n = 61

   

Autonomous

3.2 (1.2)

3.7 (1.0)

3.4 (1.1)

3.6 (1.1)

3.4 (1.1)

3.5 (1.1)

0.40 (0.11 to 0.69)*

0.10 (− 0.25 to 0.44)

− 0.30 (− 0.64 to 0.03)

Controlled

2.1 (0.7)

2.4 (0.7)

2.0 (0.6)

2.2 (0.9)

2.0 (0.5)

2.1 (0.7)

0.20 (−0.06 to 0.47)

0.02 (− 0.29 to 0.32)

− 0.18 (− 0.49 to 0.12)

Amotivation

1.2 (0.5)

1.1 (0.4)

1.3 (0.9)

1.2 (0.6)

1.1 (0.4)

1.2 (0.5)

−0.08 (− 0.33 to 0.17)

−0.06 (− 0.35 to 0.23)

0.01 (− 0.27 to 0.30)

Barriers SEDb

 

n = 40

n = 26

n = 59

   

Standing is a habit (yes)

32 (80.0%)

31 (77.5%)

22 (84.6%)

19 (73.1%)

51 (86.4%)

49 (83.1%)

2.95 (0.59 to 18.7)

3.41 (0.58 to 22.8)

1.16 (0.19 to 6.37)

Standing is uncomfortable (yes)

20 (50.0%)

16 (40.0%)

8 (30.8%)

8 (30.8%)

24 (40.7%)

25 (42.4%)

1.17 (0.26 to 4.63)

1.58 (0.29 to 8.01)

1.35 (0.26 to 7.33)

Standing is tiring (yes)

16 (40.0%)

9 (22.5%)

10 (38.5%)

6 (23.1%)

21 (35.6%)

17 (28.8%)

4.33 (0.90 to 26.7)

3.18 (0.56 to 20.9)

0.74 (0.13 to 4.00)

  1. *Posterior probability > 0.975 or < 0.025.a Posterior mean ratio. b Posterior Odds ratio