Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 3;15(5):1577. doi: 10.3390/cancers15051577

Table 2.

Baseline to 6-m differences in adiposity, diet, and physical activity in waitlist vs. DUET intervention study arms.

Waitlist Control (WL) DUET Intervention Significance (p-Values)
Baseline
Mean (SD)
6M
Mean (SD)
Baseline
Mean (SD)
6M
Mean (SD)
Between Arm Within Arm Time × Arm
Weight (kg) (Primary Outcome)
Survivors
Partners
Dyads
88.0 (17.6)
96.7 (22.6)
92.4 (20.6)
86.9 (16.1)
95.3 (22.9)
91.3 (20.3)
86.8 (18.2)
87.6 (14.0)
87.2 (16.1)
83.8 (18.4) *
84.9 (15.6) *
84.4 (16.9) *
0.656
0.069
0.044
0.001
0.001
<0.001
0.090
0.280
0.033
Waist Circumference (cm)
Survivors
Partners
Dyads
107.1 (17.7)
111.3 (15.3)
109.2 (16.7)
104.6 (14.3)
108.4 (16.4) *
106.6 (15.6) *
106.0 (11.7)
106.5 (9.5)
106.2 (10.6)
102.5 (13.4) *
103.3 (9.5) *
102.9 (11.5) *
0.667
0.144
0.128
0.003
<0.001
<0.001
0.579
0.594
0.339
Calorie Intake/day
Survivors
Partners
Dyads

1645.9 (535.0)
1553.5 (483.7)
1596.9 (515.6)

1532.0 (568.9)
1467.2 (501.3)
1497.7 (542.5)

1400.0 (439.0)
1570.2 (498.3)
1485.1 (473.1)

1265.6 (305.1)
1378.5 (408.3) *
1321.0 (360.6) *

0.027
0.716
0.053

0.046
0.012
0.001

0.836
0.286
0.365
Healthy Eating Index
Survivors
Partners
Dyads

51.8 (10.9)
55.5 (10.5)
54.0 (10.6)

50.8 (12.2)
54.6 (12.2)
52.6 (12.5)

53.9 (13.7)
52.2 (12.0)
53.1 (12.8)

58.8 (15.2)
53.9 (13.4)
56.4 (14.4)

0.092
0.416
0.396

0.360
0.874
0.589

0.163
0.587
0.130
MVPA Self-Report
Survivors
Partners
Dyad

51.9 (61.6)
43.3 (61.8)
45.6 (61.4)

57.3 (61.9)
58.1 (75.4)
57.9 (68.6)

48.5 (67.8)
39.1 (52.9)
43.1 (60.4)

103.9(104.7) *
81.6(113.5)
92.7(108.8) *

0.448
0.299
0.099

0.011
0.025
<0.001

0.189
0.356
0.229
MVPA Accelerometry
Survivors
Partners
Dyads

162.6 (172.4)
148.0 (169.0)
157.7 (171.3)

122.2 (190.2)
146.0 (278.4)
139.0 (236.8) †

108.5 (122.6)
146.4 (121.8)
127.5 (122.4)

150.3 (199.0) *
132.0 (271.4)
141.0 (236.4)

0.726
0.655
0.633

0.047
<0.001
<0.001

0.265
0.819
0.600

* Post-hoc analyses show significant improvements from baseline (p < 0.05); † Post-hoc analyses show significant declines from baseline (p < 0.05).