Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Prev Sci. 2017 Jan;18(1):71–82. doi: 10.1007/s11121-016-0736-2

Table 3.

Relationships between Facilitator Behaviors, Participant Behaviors, and Program Energy Balance-Related Behavior (EBRB) Outcomes

Program Outcomes (EBRBs)a
(student level; max=100)
Healthy Behavior
(HB)
Unhealthy Eating
Behavior Frequency
and Sedentary
Behavior (UBF)
Unhealthy Eating
Behavior Portion
Size (UBS)

Facilitator Behaviors
(class level)
estimate (SE) estimate (SE) estimate (SE)
Fidelity (max=100)
  Curriculumb −0.307 (0.181) 0.683 (0.322)* 0.236 (0.292)
  Wellnessc −0.063 (0.027)* 0.051 (0.050) −0.005 (0.044)
Teacher Interestd (max=3) −1.44 (1.478) 1.66 (2.785) 2.210 (2.703)

Participant Behaviors
(Responsiveness)
(student level)
  Curriculum Recalle (max=5) 3.224 (1.825) −2.740 (2.279) −2.804 (2.491)
  Curriculum Satisfactionf (max=5) 5.129 (1.969)** −8.222 (2.568)*** −5.276 (2.606)*
  Wellness Satisfactiong (max=5) 4.119 (2.002)* −4.437 (2.489) −7.11 (2.504)**
    Dance Breaks Satisfaction 3.191 (2.166) −0.662 (2.710) −3.098 (2.820)
    Snack Policy Satisfaction 4.208 (1.833)* −5.267 (2.237)* −7.873 (2.284)***
Moderators
  Teacher Interest X Curriculum
Fidelity
0.906 (1.286) 0.516 (1.027) 1.634 (0.915)
  Teacher Interest X Wellness
Fidelity
−0.015 (0.183) −0.178 (0.132) −0.130 (0.133)
  Curriculum Recall X Fidelity 0.511 (0.545) −0.765 (0.721) 0.292 (0.780)
  Curriculum Satisfaction X
Fidelity
0.037 (0.155) −0.017 (0.232) −0.032 (0.203)
  Wellness Satisfaction X Fidelity 0.014 (0.022) −0.056 (0.026)* −0.059 (0.025)*

Note: Models controlled for %free and reduced price lunch, %Black, %Hispanic, %English language learners, and study condition at school level, class engagement and teacher interest at class level, and baseline age, gender, EBRB, and BMI z-score at student level. Predictors were interaction variables (e.g., recallXtreatment).

a

Scales calculated using factor loadings from a Promax-rotated exploratory factor analysis of self-reported student EBRB data from the FHC-Q.

b

From feedback forms, maximum curriculum was 23 45-minute lessons; control=0; school n=15, class n=44, student n=1140.

c

From tracking posters, maximum wellness was 175 10-minute dance breaks; control=0; school n=14, class n=41, student n=954 (one school excluded)

d

From feedback forms, score calculated from mean teacher participation and mean teacher attitude for each class; school n=15, class n=45, student n=1053.

e

Data from lesson artifacts collected ¾ through the curriculum; recall for all students in control=0; school n=15, class n=44, student n=1140.

f

Data from student surveys at the conclusion of FHC; satisfaction for all students in control=0; school n=15, class n=44, student n=1140.

g

Data from student surveys at the conclusion of FHC; satisfaction for all students in control =0; school n=15, class n=45, student n=1118.

*

p<.05

**

p<.01

***

p<.001