Skip to main content

Table 3 Difference in BMI (kg/m2), waist circumference, FMI (fat mass in kg/m2) and LMI (lean mass in kg/m2) between Fit Futures 1 (2010–2011) and Fit Futures 2 (2012–2013) according to change in activity status between the surveysa

From: Longitudinal changes in body composition and waist circumference by self-reported levels of physical activity in leisure among adolescents: the Tromsø study, Fit Futures

BoysnBeta for ∆BMI (95% CI)Beta for ∆waist circumference (95% CI)Beta for ∆FMI (95% CI)Beta for ∆LMI (95% CI)
Change in activity status278Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2
 Consistently inactiveb7600000000
 Quitters500.15 (− 0.53, 0.82)0.06 (− 0.61, 0.73)− 0.11 (−2.44, 2.21)−0.29 (− 2.63, 2.04)0.08 (− 0.54, 0.70)0.02 (− 0.61, 0.64)0.02 (− 0.27, 0.30)− 0.01 (− 0.29, 0.28)
 Adopters33− 0.54 (− 1.32, 0.24)− 0.72 (− 1.49, 0.06)− 2.00 (− 4.67, 0.66)−2.39 (− 5.08, 0.30)− 0.93 (− 1.64, − 0.22)*− 1.04 (− 1.76, − 0.32)*0.33 (− 0.00, 0.66)0.29 (− 0.04, 0.62)
 Consistently active119− 0.17 (− 0.71, 0.38)− 0.47 (− 1.07, 0.13)− 1.46 (− 3.33, 0.41)− 2.32 (− 4.40, − 0.24)*− 0.42 (− 0.92, 0.09)− 0.62 (− 1.17, − 0.06)*0.22 (− 0.03, 0.46)0.13 (− 0.13, 0.40)
 ANOVA F-test 0.400.130.260.080.03< 0.010.110.29
Girls
Change in activity status348        
 Consistently inactivec8600000000
 Quitters800.14 (− 0.43, 0.70)0.14 (− 0.43, 0.72)0.48 (−1.75, 2.70)0.39 (− 1.88, 2.65)0.30 (− 0.21, 0.81)0.31 (− 0.21, 0.82)− 0.10 (− 0.30, 0.11)− 0.09 (− 0.30, 0.12)
 Adopters390.05 (− 0.66, 0.75)0.05 (− 0.66, 0.77)− 0.36 (− 3.14, 2.41)− 0.52 (− 3.33, 2.30)− 0.09 (− 0.73, 0.54)− 0.09 (− 0.73, 0.55)0.23 (− 0.02, 0.47)0.23 (− 0.02, 0.49)
 Consistently active143− 0.22 (− 0.72, 0.28)− 0.14 (− 0.69, 0.41)− 0.04 (− 2.01, 1.92)− 0.02 (− 2.19, 2.16)− 0.30 (− 0.75, 0.15)− 0.22 (− 0.72, 0.27)0.13 (− 0.05, 0.31)0.13 (− 0.06, 0.33)
 ANOVA F-test 0.540.760.940.940.090.190.020.04
  1. *Significantly different from the reference (p < 0.05)
  2. aChange in outcome in categories of activity status relative to consistently inactive as reference, and with an F-test for difference between groups. Model 1 adjusted for baseline measurement of outcome. Model 2 adjusted for baseline measurement of outcome, screen time on weekdays, regularity of eating breakfast, age in half years at baseline and days between measurements
  3. bConsistently inactive boys had a mean increase of 1.3 BMI units, 3.9 cm waist circumference, 0.9 FMI units and 0.3 LMI units
  4. cConsistently inactive girls had a mean increase of 0.8 BMI units, 0.9 cm waist circumference, 0.6 FMI units and 0.1 LMI units