ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2021
Validation of Gender Friendly Breastfeeding Knowledge scale among young adults.
Article in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associated Factors of Exclusive Breastfeeding Intention among Pregnant Women in Najran, Saudi Arabia.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Determinants of High Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy among Nursing Mothers in Najran, Saudi Arabia.Nutrients · 2023Article
- The Relationship between Maternal Ideation and Exclusive Breastfeeding Practice among Saudi Nursing Mothers: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Breastfeeding is the most effective intervention to improve child health. Young adults, both genders play an important role in society supporting breastfeeding as they will be stepping towards parenthood in the near future. Bringing awareness and busting the myths among them is essential. This study aimed to develop a Gender Friendly Breastfeeding Knowledge scale based on a conceptual framework that reflected the knowledge of young adults and evaluates its validity and reliability. Methodology: Development of the questionnaire for Conceptual framework and item generation was done using PubMed, Google Scholar, other sources and expert opinion. The type of measurement was structured as a 5-point Likert scale. The Lawshe technique to assess the content validity ratio. A cross-sectional survey in graduation colleges situated in Mangalagiri or within the radius of 30 km of Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India was conducted in 2020. 1400 Adult males and females aged 20-25 years and perusing full-time graduation course were recruited. For each item in the Gender Friendly Breastfeeding Awareness scale, we assessed individual item characteristics and item-test correlation. To check to construct validity, we performed exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Results: Expert panel retained 23 items from initially 30 items. The content validity index score for the each of 23-items in the scale was more than 0.80. A four-factor structure perfectly fitted the data and illustrated 54% of the variation in knowledge of breastfeeding. 4 stages of CFA were completed. The chi-square = 860.534 was significantly above the 0.01 level. Cronbach's alpha = 0.787 based on standardized items reflected the overall internal consistency of the Gender Friendly Breastfeeding Awareness scale. Conclusion: Gender Friendly Breastfeeding Knowledge scale is a valid and reliable tool, it is recommended that this scale be used in communities, educational institutions, and in relevant research to assess Breastfeeding knowledge among young adults of both genders, thereby promoting breastfeeding practices in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.