Skip to main content
. 2014 Mar 28;2014(3):CD008567. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008567.pub3

Comparison 3. HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE versus AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Physical health behaviour: Average steps per day (high = good, skewed)     Other data No numeric data
2 Physical health: 1. Metabolic syndrome ‐ present 1 13 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.25 [0.35, 4.49]
3 Physical health: 2. Average score for working capacity ‐ various tests 1   Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) Subtotals only
3.1 shuttle test ‐ lengths of 10 metres walked (Incremental shuttle walk test, high = good) 1 30 Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) ‐157.0 [‐321.11, 7.11]
3.2 Borg test (RPE ‐ rate of perceived exertion test, high = good) 1 25 Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) 2.10 [0.04, 4.16]
4 Physical health: 3. Various continuous data (skewed)     Other data No numeric data
4.1 metabolic syndrome ‐ average criteria score     Other data No numeric data
4.2 average risk of fatal cardiovascular disease ‐ at present (Heart Score, high = good, skewed data)     Other data No numeric data
4.3 average risk of fatal cardiovascular disease ‐ by 10 years (Heart Score, high = good, skewed data)     Other data No numeric data