Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.

Published in final edited form as: Appetite. 2016 Apr 29;103:336–343. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.04.035

Table 5.

Estimates from the mediator models for dietary outcomes.

	Low-carbohydrate diet (n=112)								Low-fat diet (n=93)

	Low-carbohydrate diet congruency preference				Low-fat diet congruency preference				Low-carbohydrate diet congruency preference				Low-fat diet congruency preference

		Beta^a	SE	p- value		Beta^a	SE	p- value		Beta^a	SE	p- value		Beta^a	SE	p- value
Weight → food preference
Weeks 0 → 12 (c1)		.099	.09	.24		.027	.09	.78		−.062	.10	.53		−.042	.10	.69
Weeks 12 → 24 (c2)		−.139	.07	.04		−.05	.08	.50		.150	.08	.07		.108	.08	.19
Weeks 24 → 36 (c3)		−.077	.07	.29		−.07	.08	.38		−.115	.08	.16		−.135	.08	.10
Weeks 36 → 48 (c4)		.007	.09	.94		.003	.09	.97		−.066	.08	.40		−.071	.08	.37
Food preferences → weight
Weeks 0 → 12 (d1)		−.006	.02	.77		−.007	.02	.74		−.016	.02	.39		−.006	.02	.78
Weeks 12 → 24 (d2)		−.048	.02	.008		−.03	.02	.10		−.024	.02	.25		−.01	.02	.63
Weeks 24 → 36 (d3)		.005	.02	.798		−.009	.02	.64		−.005	.02	.75		.007	.02	.67
Weeks 36 → 48 (d4)		.000	.02	.99		.014	.02	.42		−.011	.02	.52		−.009	.02	.59
Model Fit indices
X2	139.5				123.1				136.8				150.7
RMSEA	.10				0.08				0.10				.113
CFI	.96				.96				0.95				.94
TLI	.94				.95				.94				.92

Note.

^a

All coefficient values are standardized,

^b

Degrees of freedom for all chi-squared analyses for model fit is 69.