## 3 Results
### Analysis of Variance
For the scores of triglycerides, HDL, LDL, and cholesterol, this effect explains 92.5%, 80%, 93.4%, and 96.5% of the variability, respectively. The interaction effect (joint simultaneous influence) of group membership and measurement is statistically significant with a significance threshold of 10% only for muscle percentage (\(p=0.07\)). This interaction explains 6% of the variability in muscle percentage. The interaction of group and measurement on other variables is not statistically significant (\(p>0.1\)). The percentage of variability in all other body characteristic variables explained by this interaction is less than 5%. For the scores of triglycerides, HDL, LDL, and cholesterol, the interaction effect of group membership and measurement explains 82.5%, 58%, 82.4%, and 90% of the variability, respectively. [PERSON]'s post hoc test showed statistically significant differences in the effects between the groups, control and step aerobics (\(p=0.045\)), and control and mix aerobics (\(p=0.028\)) for the variable muscle percentage. The effects of the training programs in the mix aerobics, kickboxing, and step aerobics groups did not significantly differ from each other. The effect of each group (mix aerobics, kickboxing, and step aerobics) on waist circumference was statistically significantly higher compared to the effect of the control group (\(p\leq 0.006<0.05\)), but the effects between these groups did not significantly differ (\(p\geq 0.510>0.05\)). The effect of each group (mix aerobics, kickboxing, and step aerobics) on triglycerides was statistically significantly higher compared to the effect of the control group (\(p<0.001<0.05\)). The effect of kickboxing was significantly greater than the effect of step aerobics (\(p=0.003\)). The effect of mix aerobics was significantly greater compared to the effects of both kickboxing (\(p=0.045\)) and step aerobics (\(p<0.001\)). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Variable**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Analysis of Variance \(p\left(\eta_{p}^{2}\right)\)**} \\  & **Group** & **Measurement** & **Group \(\times\) Measurement** \\ \hline BW & 0.879 (0.006) & 0.004 (0.069) *** & 0.235 (0.037) \\ BMI & 0.658 (0.014) & 0.012 (0.055) ** & 0.340 (0.029) \\ TSF-TH & 0.098 (0.054) * & 0.045 (0.035) ** & 0.674 (0.013) \\ TSF-UA & 0.555 (0.013) & 0.043 (0.035) ** & 0.688 (0.013) \\ WC & \textless{}0.001 (0.177) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.108) *** & 0.115 (0.050) \\ BF\% & 0.122 (0.049) & 0.012 (0.054) ** & 0.313 (0.031) \\ MM\% & 0.025 (0.078) ** & \textless{}0.001 (0.146) *** & 0.070 (0.060) * \\ TSF-AB & 0.058 (0.063) * & 0.006 (0.066) *** & 0.318 (0.030) \\ TG & \textless{}0.001 (0.725) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.925) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.825) *** \\ HDL & \textless{}0.001 (0.684) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.800) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.580) *** \\ LDL & \textless{}0.001 (0.829) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.934) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.827) *** \\ TC & \textless{}0.001 (0.904) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.965) *** & \textless{}0.001 (0.900) *** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* 0.05 \(<=p<\) 0.1; ** \(p<0.05\); ** \(p<0.01\); BW—body weight; BMI—body mass index; TSF-TH—skinfold thickness (thigh); TSF-UA—skinfold thickness (upper arm); WC—waist circumference; BF\%—body fat percentage; MM%—muscle mass percentage; TSF-AB—skinfold thickness (abdomen); TG—triglycerides; HDL—high-density lipoprotein; LDL—low-density lipoprotein; TC—total cholesterol.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Results of two-way analysis of variance with squared partial eta coefficient and \(p\)-value indicating the significance of the effect measured by this coefficient. The effect of each group (mix aerobics, kickboxing, and step aerobics) on HDL was statistically significantly higher compared to the effect of the control group (\(p\) = 0.001). The effect of kickboxing was significantly greater than the effect of step aerobics (\(p\) = 0.003).