Table 2.

Logistic regression models showing whether intervention students maintained or increased their advantage, relative to controls in terms of performance of each skill to mastery/near mastery level (MNM) at follow-up; controlling for MNM level at end of intervention, gender and grade

Skills							95% CI
		Beta	SE	Wald	P	Odds ratio	Lower	Upper
Catch	Intercept	1.80	.57	9.86	.002
	MNM in 2000	.40	.45	.77	.380	1.49	.61	3.61
	Grade	-1.23	.54	5.24	.022	.29	.10	.84
	Gender	.97	.48	4.01	.045	2.63	1.02	6.78
	Intervention status	1.71	.53	10.39	.001	5.51	1.95	15.55
Throw	Intercept	2.36	.42	31.92	.000
	MNM in 2000	.47	.39	1.47	.226	1.60	.75	3.41
	Grade	-2.13	.36	34.27	.000	.12	.06	.24
	Gender	-.21	.32	.00	.948	.98	.53	1.83
	Intervention status	-.84	.33	6.57	.010	.43	.23	.82
Kick	Intercept	1.86	.42	19.40	.000
	MNM in 2000	.66	.37	3.07	.080	1.93	.93	4.00
	Grade	-2.69	.37	52.78	.000	.07	.03	.14
	Gender	.09	.32	.07	.787	1.09	.58	2.06
	Intervention status	-.93	.35	7.05	.008	.39	.20	.78
Jump	Intercept	1.07	.37	8.19	.004
	MNM in 2000	1.19	.51	5.51	.019	3.27	1.22	8.81
	Grade	.27	.36	.56	.456	1.31	.64	2.68
	Gender	.33	.36	.82	.364	1.39	.68	2.84
	Intervention status	.14	.36	.14	.712	1.14	.56	2.34
Gallop	Intercept	2.32	.48	23.29	.000
	MNM in 2000	.04	.41	.01	.932	1.04	.46	2.31
	Grade	-.50	.43	1.37	.242	.61	.26	1.40
	Gender	-.20	.41	.24	.623	.82	.37	1.82
	Intervention status	.21	.42	.26	.613	1.24	.55	2.79

Note: Reference categories were: 'Male', 'Yr 10', 'Control' and '0 Skill'