ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2025
Development and validation of a novel self-assessment tool for breastfeeding mothers.
Article in International breastfeeding journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of the breastfeeding resilience scale (BRS) among employed mothers after returning to work.International breastfeeding journal · 2026Article
- Development, feasibility testing and evaluation of a family-oriented mobile application to promote healthy lifestyle in infants and parents during early life: a mixed methods study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDifficulties with breastfeeding can lead to early breastfeeding cessation. Empowering mothers through self-assessment and education of breastfeeding skills can help support them. We aimed to develop and validate a tool for self-screening and education on breastfeeding skills.
methodsA six-item tool was developed through literature review and expert interviews, covering domains of breastfeeding position, nipple shape, breast engorgement, infant latch, swallowing and intake. Eight experts assessed the tool's relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity. Scores were used to determine item-level content validity index (I-CVI) and scale-level content validity index (S-CVI). Items with values ≤ 0.83 (best possible score = 1.00) were revised. Following revision, a convenience sample of breastfeeding mothers were recruited from maternity wards and clinics to determine the tool's internal consistency, face, criterion and construct validity. Participants and lactation consultants (LC) independently completed the tool based on the same breastfeeding episode. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing participant and LC scores using Bland-Altman plots. Construct validity was determined by comparing scores in participants who were and were not referred to a LC. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine a cut-off score for LC referral by optimizing sensitivity and specificity.
resultsThe tool demonstrated acceptable content validity, with I-CVI and S-CVI values for relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity above the threshold, except for S-CVI of simplicity and ambiguity, and the tool was revised accordingly. Most mothers who completed the tool (n = 58) found it easy to understand (87.9%), relevant (91.4%) and useful (86.2%). Cronbach's alpha was 0.66, which improved to 0.74 with the removal of the item on "engorgement". With the remaining five items, ROC analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.79 [(95%CI 0.67-0.90), p < 0.001], with a score of ≤ 6 indicative of an LC referral (sensitivity = 86%, specificity = 55%). Bland-Altman plots showed acceptable agreement between participant and LC scores with a mean difference of 0.22 (95%CI -3.02-3.47).
conclusionsWe developed and validated a simple five-item tool for mothers to assess and be educated about breastfeeding skills. Further study on the tool's predictive validity and effectiveness within a clinical pathway is warranted.
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.