Table 8.
Univariate meta-regression examining dose-response relationships between hypoxia parameters and body composition outcomes
| outcome | dose variable | k | coefficient | se | CI lower | CI upper | pval | R squared | direction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMI | Fio2 level % | 7 | 0.371 | 0.437 | −0.486 | 1.228 | 0.396 | 0.000 | Lower FiO2 → Greater benefit |
| BMI | Session duration | 7 | 0.002 | 0.009 | −0.015 | 0.020 | 0.789 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| BMI | Sessions per week | 7 | −0.880 | 0.696 | −2.245 | 0.485 | 0.206 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| BMI | Intervention weeks | 7 | 0.029 | 0.061 | −0.090 | 0.149 | 0.630 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| BMI | Total exposure hours | 7 | 0.004 | 0.009 | −0.013 | 0.021 | 0.678 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| BMI | Hypoxia dose score | 7 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.735 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Body Weight | Fio2 level % | 5 | 1.850 | 2.057 | −2.182 | 5.882 | 0.369 | 0.000 | Lower FiO2 → Greater benefit |
| Body Weight | Session duration | 5 | −0.011 | 0.037 | −0.082 | 0.061 | 0.766 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Body Weight | Sessions per week | 5 | −2.902 | 3.925 | −10.594 | 4.791 | 0.460 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Body Weight | Intervention weeks | 5 | 0.001 | 0.204 | −0.399 | 0.401 | 0.996 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Body Weight | Total exposure hours | 5 | −0.002 | 0.030 | −0.061 | 0.057 | 0.943 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Body Weight | Hypoxia dose score | 5 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.914 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Fio2 level % | 5 | 1.172 | 2.246 | −3.230 | 5.574 | 0.602 | 0.000 | Lower FiO2 → Greater benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Session duration | 5 | −0.008 | 0.032 | −0.071 | 0.055 | 0.809 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Sessions per week | 5 | 0.535 | 1.785 | −2.963 | 4.032 | 0.765 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Intervention weeks | 5 | 0.012 | 0.162 | −0.306 | 0.329 | 0.943 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Total exposure hours | 5 | 0.001 | 0.025 | −0.047 | 0.050 | 0.961 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Body Fat Percentage | Hypoxia dose score | 5 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.937 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Fat Mass | Fio2 level % | 5 | 0.039 | 1.138 | −2.191 | 2.270 | 0.972 | 0.000 | Lower FiO2 → Greater benefit |
| Fat Mass | Session duration | 5 | −0.029 | 0.067 | −0.161 | 0.103 | 0.664 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Fat Mass | Sessions per week | 5 | −0.772 | 1.502 | −3.716 | 2.173 | 0.608 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Fat Mass | Intervention weeks | 5 | 0.011 | 0.718 | −1.396 | 1.418 | 0.988 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Fat Mass | Total exposure hours | 5 | −0.052 | 0.123 | −0.294 | 0.190 | 0.675 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Fat Mass | Hypoxia dose score | 5 | 0.000 | 0.000 | −0.001 | 0.000 | 0.769 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Fio2 level % | 4 | 1.484 | 1.324 | −1.111 | 4.080 | 0.262 | 15.510 | Lower FiO2 → Greater benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Session duration | 4 | −0.013 | 0.057 | −0.124 | 0.099 | 0.824 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Sessions per week | 4 | −2.233 | 7.341 | −16.622 | 12.156 | 0.761 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Greater benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Intervention weeks | 4 | 0.133 | 0.313 | −0.481 | 0.746 | 0.672 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Total exposure hours | 4 | 0.008 | 0.045 | −0.080 | 0.095 | 0.860 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
| Waist Circumference | Hypoxia dose score | 4 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.957 | 0.000 | Higher dose → Less benefit |
Coefficients (β₁) represent the change in mean difference per unit increase in each dose parameter. Positive coefficients indicate that higher doses associate with smaller treatment effects (less favourable outcomes) while negative coefficients indicate that higher doses associate with larger treatment effects (more favorable outcomes). Statistical significance set at p < 0.05. R² represents the proportion of between-study heterogeneity explained by each dose parameter.
k number of studies contributing to each analysis, SE Standard error, CI Confidence interval