Quality of life in overweight and obese young Chinese children: a mixed-method study

Table 1 One-way ANOVA values comparing PedsQL among children with different weight status ( N = 336)

Subscale	n	Mean	SD	Difference	df	F	p value	Effect size (η ²)
PedsQL
Physical Functioning				b>d*	3,163	6.100	.001	.0473
Underweight_a	94	71.14	21.25
Normal Weight_b	94	79.42	17.54
Overweight_c	93	72.24	23.34
Obese_d	55	65.23	24.17
Emotional Functioning					3,332	.680	.565	.0061
Underweight_a	94	69.52	16.95
Normal Weight_b	94	70.16	17.67
Overweight_c	93	72.90	17.56
Obese_d	55	70.73	16.14
Social Functioning					3,332	3.299	.021	.0289
Underweight_a	94	76.22	16.84
Normal Weight_b	94	81.12	16.64
Overweight_c	93	76.67	19.62
Obese_d	55	71.82	18.09
School Functioning				b>c*	3,332	5.278	.001	.0455
Underweight_a	94	67.94	19.46
Normal Weight_b	94	75.66	19.33
Overweight_c	93	65.50	20.25
Obese_d	55	65.09	20.76
Psychosocial Health Summary					3,332	2.392	.068	.0212
Underweight_a	94	71.36	13.53
Normal Weight_b	94	75.58	15.08
Overweight_c	93	71.93	15.59
Obese_d	55	69.38	15.01

Note: *p < 0.0083 based on Tukey’s HSD and Tamhane’s T2 post hoc test. Eta squared (η²) of 0.0099 indicates a small effect, 0.0588 indicates a medium effect and 0.1379 indicates a large effect [33].

ISSN: 1477-7525