Table 4.
Varying composition by 1 h and using linear regression models to estimate glucose
| Varying compositions by 60 mina | Δ FPG% | Δ 2hPLG% | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Risk (n = 375) | Higher Risk (n = 272) | Lower Risk (n = 373) | Higher Risk (n = 267) | |
| Sit → Sleep | −1.1% (− 2.0, − 0.2) | 0.3% (− 1.2, 1.8) | 0.9% (− 1.8, 3.6) | 1.5% (− 2.1, 5.1) |
| Sit → Stand | 0.0% (−0.8, 0.7) | −1.5% (− 2.4, − 0.5) | 0.1% (− 1.9, 2.2) | −1.0% (− 3.3, 1.3) |
| Sit → Step | −0.6% (− 1.9, 0.7) | −1.4% (− 3.4, 0.7) | −3.8% (− 7.3, − 0.2) | −5.0% (− 9.7, − 0.0) |
| Stand → Sleep | −1.1% (− 2.2, 0.0) | 2.1% (0.3, 3.9) | 0.7% (− 2.6, 4.1) | 2.7% (− 1.7, 7.3) |
| Stand → Sit | −0.1% (− 0.9, 0.7) | 1.7% (0.6, 2.9) | −0.2% (− 2.6, 2.2) | 1.2% (− 1.5, 4.0) |
| Stand → Step | − 0.7% (− 2.4, 1.1) | 0.4% (− 2.2, 3.1) | −4.0% (− 8.8, 1.1) | −3.8% (− 9.8, 2.6) |
| Step → Sleep | −0.3% (− 2.6, 1.9) | 2.5% (− 0.8, 5.9) | 7.8% (0.9, 15.1) | 10.8% (2.4, 19.9) |
| Step→ Sit | 0.7% (− 1.4, 2.8) | 2.1% (− 1.2, 5.6) | 6.9% (0.6, 13.5) | 9.1% (0.6, 18.5) |
| Step → Stand | 0.7% (− 1.8, 3.2) | 0.7% (−3.1, 4.5) | 7.0% (−0.4, 15.0) | 8.1% (− 1.4, 18.5) |
| Sleep → Sit | 1.1% (0.2, 2.1) | −0.4% (− 1.9, 1.1) | −1.0% (− 3.6, 1.8) | −1.7% (− 5.2, 2.0) |
| Sleep → Stand | 1.1% (0.0, 2.2) | −1.8% (− 3.5, − 0.2) | − 0.8% (− 3.8, 2.3) | −2.6% (− 6.6, 1.4) |
| Sleep → Step | 0.5% (− 1.0, 2.1) | −1.7% (− 3.7, 0.3) | − 4.8% (− 8.8, − 0.6) | −6.5% (− 11.0, − 1.8) |
Values expressed as the percentage difference (95% CI) between the new composition’s estimated glucose value and the original geometric mean glucose value (Δ FPG% or Δ 2hPLG%) for each diabetes risk group
aCompositions tested varied by 60 min from geometric means, for example, “Sit→ Stand” denotes 60 minutes subtracted from sitting time and added to standing time geometric means