Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 8;21(10):1865–1873. doi: 10.1017/S1368980018000368

Table 1.

Summary results of moderator analyses for the prevalence ratio estimates

95 % CI
k PR Lower limit Upper limit ANOVA/meta-regression results
Gender
Female 19 0·791 0·726 0·861 Q B(2)=19·975, P<0·01; R 2=0·091
Male 19 0·862 0·794 0·936
Mixed 18 0·828 0·754 0·909
Weight status category
Overweight 24 0·855 0·787 0·929 Q B(2)=39·006, P<0·01; R 2=0·145
Obese 24 0·799 0·706 0·904
Mixed 12 0·805 0·730 0·888
Weight status screening tools
CDC 10 0·831 0·741 0·932 Q B(2)=25·076, P<0·01; R 2=0·117
IOTF 14 0·760 0·683 0·845
WHO 3 1·006 0·547 1·849
National-specific standard 7 0·886 0·822 0·956
Age
B PR 36 −0·051 −0·096 −0·005 Q regression=4·727, P<0·05; R 2=0·125

k, number of studies; PR, prevalence ratio; CDC, Centers for Disease and Control; IOTF, International Obesity Task Force; B PR, meta-regression coefficient; Q B, between-group heterogeneity statistic to test the effect of the moderator variable on the prevalence rates; R 2, proportion of variance accounted for by the moderator variable; Q regression, heterogeneity accounted for by the regression model.