Table 4.

Differences in differences of the effect of the intervention on the dependent variables by their arm of the study (post hoc tests) among moderately thin children 5–7 years of age in Jimma Town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2023.

Dependent Variable	Types of Intervention	Mean Difference	Std. Err	95% CI		p
				Lower	Upper
Height (cm) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	1.20	0.28	0.64	1.76	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	2.20	0.28	1.65	2.75	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	1.00	0.27	0.46	1.54	<0.001
Weight (kg) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	1.50	0.27	0.97	2.03	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	1.62	0.26	1.10	2.14	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	0.11	0.25	−0.39	0.62	0.653
Grip strength (kg) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	1.04	0.46	−0.08	2.16	0.074
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	2.80	0.38	1.88	3.72	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	1.76	0.50	0.54	2.98	0.003
Elbow flexor (N) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	20.63	3.28	12.58	28.68	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	15.93	2.42	10.06	21.80	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	−4.70	3.49	−13.21	3.81	0.379
Quadricep strength (N) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	11.00	3.97	1.29	20.70	0.023
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	16.73	2.99	9.47	23.99	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	5.74	3.97	−3.96	15.43	0.329
Gastrocnemius sup flexor of the leg (N) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	18.95	3.42	12.11	25.79	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	9.75	3.36	3.05	16.46	0.005
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	−9.20	3.28	−15.75	−2.65	0.007
Fat mass (kg) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	0.83	0.35	0.13	1.52	0.021
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	0.80	0.34	0.12	1.48	0.022
	RUSF+ HiML vs. RUSF	−0.03	0.33	−0.69	0.64	0.938
Fat-free mass (kg) difference	RUSF vs. No intervention	1.03	0.37	0.13	1.93	0.022
	RUSF + HiML vs. No intervention	2.20	0.53	0.90	3.49	<0.001
	RUSF + HiML vs. RUSF	1.16	0.49	−0.04	2.37	0.059

RUSF: Ready-to-Use Supplementary Food; HiML: high-intensity motor learning. Bold values indicate significance (alpha < 0.05).