Table 4. Two-way ANOVA analysis for fatigue type (PF vs. PMF) and gender (male vs. female) on HRV parameters.
| Measures |
Source |
df |
F |
P |
η2 |
| ∆RMSSD |
Fatigue type |
1 |
0.78 |
0.38 |
0.02 |
| Gender |
1 |
2.82 |
0.10 |
0.05 |
| Fatigue type × Gender |
1 |
2.73 |
0.11 |
0.05 |
| Error |
67 |
|
|
|
| ∆SDNN |
Fatigue type |
1 |
0.14 |
0.71 |
0.00 |
| Gender |
1 |
1.16 |
0.29 |
0.02 |
| Fatigue type × Gender |
1 |
1.28 |
0.31 |
0.14 |
| Error |
67 |
|
|
|
| ∆LF |
Fatigue type |
1 |
0.28 |
0.60 |
0.01 |
| Gender |
1 |
2.73 |
0.10 |
0.05 |
| Fatigue type × Gender |
1 |
0.37 |
0.55 |
0.01 |
| Error |
67 |
|
|
|
| ∆HF |
Fatigue type |
1 |
0.01 |
0.92 |
0.00 |
| Gender |
1 |
4.29 |
0.04 |
0.08 |
| Fatigue type × Gender |
1 |
0.00 |
0.96 |
0.00 |
| Error |
67 |
|
|
|
| ∆LF/HF |
Fatigue type |
1 |
0.08 |
0.78 |
0.00 |
| Gender |
1 |
2.26 |
0.14 |
0.04 |
| Fatigue type × Gender |
1 |
0.00 |
0.99 |
0.00 |
| Error |
67 |
|
|
|
