Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug 4;10(8):e0134804. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134804

Table 3. Meta- regression analysis.

Variables Univariate Multivariate
Β (95%CI), p Β (95%CI), p
RCT study design
    Quality (ref: ≥5 vs <5) 0.09 (-0.19 to 0.38), 0.916
    Intensity of intervention (min/d) -0.002 (-0.008, 0.003), 0.39
    Frequency of intervention (times/wk) 0.06 (-0.05 to 0.16), 0.27
    Length of intervention (wks) (continuous) -0.002 (-0.01 to 0.01), 0.69
    Sample type (ref: non-normal vs normal) 0.10 (-0.27 to 0.46), 0.60
    Setting of intervention (ref: clinc/detention facility/family vs school/gymnasium) 0.31 (0.07 to 0.55), 0.013 0.31 (0.03 to 0.55), 0.068
Non-RCT study design
    Quality (ref: ≥6 vs <6) -0.07 (-0.57 to 0.42), 0.75
    Intensity of intervention (min/d) 0.00 (-0.01 to 0.01), 0.86
    Frequency of intervention (times/wk) 0.03 (-0.14 to 0.19), 0.74
    Length of intervention (wks) (continuous) -0.01 (-0.03 to 0.01), 0.39
    Sample type (ref: non-normal vs normal) 0.15 (-0.36 to 0.67), 0.53
    Setting of intervention (ref: clinc/detention facility/family vs school/gymnasium) -0.12 (-0.84 to 0.60), 0.73

B, regression coefficient; RCT, randomized controlled trial; Non-RCT, non-randomized controlled trial; Ref, reference category.

No significant association was found between effect sizes and intensity of intervention, frequency of intervention, length of intervention, participant type, and study quality in RCTs, as well as all assessed factors in non-RCTs.