M. Machida et al.: Radioprotection 2025, 60( 4), 354 – 359 357
Table 2. Change in score before and after workshop.
Are you satisfied with your health?
How do you feel about the community where you live?
How do you feel about the food where you live?
Are you willing to help prepare meals at home?
Group No. of students a Preworkshop
Postworkshop
P value b
I |
81 |
3.36 |
3.85 |
Interaction: 0.238 Main effect: group 0.556, time < 0.001 |
II |
115 |
3.52 |
3.83 |
|
I |
83 |
3.72 |
3.95 |
Interaction: 0.033 |
|
|
|
|
Simple effect: group 0.364 at pre-workshop and 0.937 at postworkshop |
|
|
|
|
; time 0.019 for Group 1 and 0.596 for Group II |
II |
114 |
3.83 |
3.78 |
|
I |
78 |
3.72 |
3.91 |
Interaction: 0.620 |
|
|
|
|
Main effect: group 0.293, time 0.007 |
II |
113 |
3.92 |
4.05 |
|
I |
76 |
3.51 |
3.63 |
Interaction: 0.542 |
|
|
|
|
Main effect: group < 0.001, time 0.254 |
II |
111 |
3.96 |
4.00 |
|
a Total number of the participants were 92 in Group I( FOOD, BODY, and ACT) and 125 in Group II( FOOD and BODY). Only data for participants who gave responses both pre-workshop and post-workshop were analyzed. b A two-way mixed-design ANOVA was used. Fig. 1.( 1-1) Cooccurrence Network after FOOD, BODY and ACT workshops.