Table 2

Estimates for trajectories for WLC (A) and comparisons with active treatment groups (B1–3)

EstimateSE95% CI
A. Estimates, SE and 95% CI for intercept (I), slope (S) and quadratic (Q) terms for WLC
 I10.340.609.15 to 11.49
 S−0.150.26−0.65 to 0.38
 Q−0.010.04−0.09 to 0.07
B. Estimates for differences between each group and WLC
B1. Differences in estimates for I
 HIIT versus WLC0.260.87−1.46 to 1.97
 Yoga versus WLC−0.340.86−2.02 to 1.34
 HIIT+yoga versus WLC−1.270.83−2.89 to 0.35
B2. Differences in estimates for S
 HIIT versus WLC0.770.381.51 to0.04
 Yoga versus WLC−0.700.40−1.49 to 0.08
 HIIT+yoga versus WLC0.920.391.69 to −0.14
B3. Differences in estimates for Q
 HIIT versus WLC0.110.060.00 to 0.22
 Yoga versus WLC0.080.06−0.05 to 0.20
 HIIT+yoga versus WLC0.110.06−0.01 to 0.23
  • Results from the SEM model estimating intercept, slope and quadratic term for WLC (section A) and comparisons of these estimates with those of the three active groups (HIIT, yoga, HIIT+yoga; section B). Bold text denotes p<0.05.

  • HIIT, high intensity interval training; SEM, structural equation model; WLC, waitlist control.