ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale to assess exclusive breastfeeding: a cross-sectional study in rural China.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding, the proportion of exclusively breastfed children remains low in rural China. Self-efficacy is one of the most crucial modifiable factors predicting breastfeeding behavior. However, existing instruments in China do not specifically measure self-efficacy for exclusive breastfeeding but rather measure self-efficacy for any breastfeeding. Furthermore, they have been validated only in high-income Chinese settings. We sought to adapt and validate an instrument to measure exclusive breastfeeding self-efficacy within rural Chinese contexts.
methodsWe introduced relevant items to Dennis' Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF), which can assess maternal self-efficacy for exclusive breastfeeding. It was then implemented in a multistage random cluster sampling design and cross-sectional survey with home-visit interviews among women 0-6 months postpartum (n = 654) in the rural areas of four counties in Sichuan, China. We performed item-total and adjusted item-total correlations, as well as exploratory factor analysis to remove redundant items and determine the latent factor structure. We further applied confirmatory factor analysis to test the dimensionality of the scale. We then assessed the reliability of the scale and conducted tests of predictive and divergent validity. Known group comparisons were made by primiparous status and breastfeeding support level. We compared the validated Exclusive Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale with the BSES-SF in terms of reliability and validity to explore the added value of scale modification.
resultsOur modification of the BSES-SF to target exclusive breastfeeding produced 19 items. This was further reduced to 15 items based on adjusted item-total correlations and exploratory factor analysis, forming the Exclusive Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale. This scale had three dimensions: "Breast milk supply and quality," "Breastfeeding skills," and "Exclusive breastfeeding" subscales. The Exclusive Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale demonstrated strong internal consistency and overall reliability with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.91. Predictive and divergent validity and known group comparison assessments supported its validity. Robust psychometric evaluations demonstrated enhanced validity and reliability compared to the original BSES-SF.
conclusionsOur Exclusive Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale is valid and reliable for measuring exclusive breastfeeding self-efficacy within rural Chinese contexts and is ready for adaptation and validation for clinical and programmatic use elsewhere, particularly within LMICs.
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.