ArticleKorean journal of women health nursing2020
[Breastfeeding Adaptation Scale-Short Form for mothers at 2 weeks postpartum: construct validity, reliability, and measurement invariance].
Article in Korean journal of women health nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of a Self-Efficacy-Based Breastfeeding Support Program (SBP) on Primipara's Breastfeeding and Postnatal Depression.Iranian journal of public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study was conducted to evaluate the construct validity, reliability, measurement invariance, and latent mean differences in the Breastfeeding Adaptation Scale-Short Form (BFAS-SF) for use with mothers at 2 weeks postpartum. Methods: This methodological study was designed to evaluate the validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of from 431 breastfeeding mothers. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-group confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to assess the factor structure and the measurement invariance across employment status, delivery mode, parity, and previous breastfeeding experience, and the latent mean differences were then examined. Results: The goodness of fit of the six-factor model at 2 weeks postpartum was acceptable. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis supported strict invariance of the BFAS-SF across employment status and delivery mode. Full configural invariance, full metric invariance, and partial scalar invariance across parity and full configural invariance and full metric invariance across previous breastfeeding experience were supported, respectively. The results for latent mean differences suggested that mothers who were employed showed significantly higher scores for breastfeeding confidence. Mothers who had a vaginal delivery showed significantly higher scores for sufficient breast milk and baby's feeding capability. Multiparous mothers showed significantly higher scores for baby's feeding capability and baby's satisfaction with breastfeeding. Conclusion: The validity and reliability of the BFAS-SF at 2 weeks postpartum are acceptable. It can be used to compare mean scores of breastfeeding adaptation according to employment status, delivery mode, and parity.
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.