Psychometric Assessment of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Indonesian Mothers

Sandhi, Ayyu; Kuo, Shu‐Yu

doi:10.1177/10547738221112756

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common time to assess breastfeeding self-efficacy was in-hospital during the postpartum period ( n = 17; 41%). However, the timing of assessment varied among some studies with assessment of breastfeeding self-efficacy conducted during the third trimester of pregnancy [ 26 , 27 ], postnatally (time not reported) [ 28 , 29 ], at 1 week [ 27 ], or open time periods such as two to six weeks [ 20 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, women with higher scores on the EPDS had significantly lower BSES scores. Using other measurements of depression, Boateng et al [ 37 ] reported a negative correlation between Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) [ 60 ] and BSES-SF scores and two researchers [ 29 , 54 ] reported a negative correlation between the HADS depression subscale and BSES-SF scores. All three studies that examined the correlation between anxiety and BSES-SF, researchers found a negative correlation between anxiety and BSES-SF scores, using different measurement tools [ 21 , 29 , 38 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using other measurements of depression, Boateng et al [ 37 ] reported a negative correlation between Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) [ 60 ] and BSES-SF scores and two researchers [ 29 , 54 ] reported a negative correlation between the HADS depression subscale and BSES-SF scores. All three studies that examined the correlation between anxiety and BSES-SF, researchers found a negative correlation between anxiety and BSES-SF scores, using different measurement tools [ 21 , 29 , 38 ]. Lastly, Otsuka et al [ 50 ] reported a negative correlation between BSES-SF scores and maternal perceptions of insufficient milk supply as measured by the PIM tool.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Psychometrics of the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale and short form: a systematic review

Dennis,

McQueen,

Dol

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale and its short-form were developed in Canada and have been used internationally among numerous maternal populations. However, the psychometric properties of the scales have not been reviewed to confirm their appropriateness in measuring breastfeeding self-efficacy in culturally diverse populations. The purpose of this research was to critically appraise and synthesize the psychometric properties of the scales via systematic review. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Three databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) were searched from 1999 (original publication of the Scale) until April 27, 2022. The search was updated on April 1, 2023. Studies that assessed the psychometric properties of the BSES or BSES-SF were included. Two researchers independently extracted data and completed the quality appraisals. Results Forty-one studies evaluated the psychometrics of the BSES (n = 5 studies) or BSES-SF (n = 36 studies) among demographically or culturally diverse populations. All versions of the instrument demonstrated good reliability, with Cronbach's alphas ranging from .72 to .97. Construct validity was supported by statistically significant differences in mean scores among women with and without previous breastfeeding experience and by correlations between the scales and theoretically related constructs. Predictive validity was demonstrated by statistically significant lower scores among women who ultimately discontinued breastfeeding compared to those who did not. Conclusion The BSES and BSES-SF appear to be valid and reliable measures of breastfeeding self-efficacy that may be used globally to (1) assess women who may be at risk of negative breastfeeding outcomes (e.g., initiation, duration and exclusivity), (2) individualize breastfeeding support, and (3) evaluate the effectiveness of breastfeeding interventions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometrics of the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale and short form: a systematic review

Dennis,

McQueen,

Dol

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Can EPDS and EPDS‐3A be used to replace GAD‐7 to screen the anxiety of pregnant women during pregnancy examination?

Pan

Xu²

2023

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo examine the screening ability and cut‐off scores of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and EPDS‐3A for pregnancy anxiety in pregnancy examination.MethodsThis was a prospective repetitive measurement study. A follow‐up survey was performed in Chinese pregnant women with the EPDS, the 7‐item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD‐7) scale and a basic information questionnaire. A total of 609 women participated in all surveys at three trimesters, and all data were complete with no missing values. Receiver operating characteristic curves, Cohen's kappa and cross‐tabulation were used to test the single and combined screening ability of EPDS and EPDS‐3A for pregnancy anxiety.ResultsThe areas under the curves of EPDS and EPDS‐3A were close to or more than 0.90. EPDS scores greater than 14 in the first trimester and greater than 13 in the second and third trimesters could be used as the cut‐off values. EPDS‐3A score greater than 4 could be used as the cut‐off value in each trimester. Adding the EPDS‐3A to the EPDS would lead to correct identification of an additional 6.33%, 6.35%, and 7.25% of anxious women and misdiagnosis of an additional 6.60%, 2.56%, and 2.41% of normal women in each trimester, respectively.ConclusionThe EPDS and EPDS‐3A can be used alone or in combination for initially screening of pregnancy anxiety. Under certain conditions, they can even be used to replace GAD‐7 for anxiety screening to reduce the adverse influence of excessive screening on pregnant women, and improve the quality of survey data and efficiency of clinical services.

show abstract

Psychometric evaluation of the Indonesian version of paternal breastfeeding self-efficacy scale- short form: A confirmatory factor analysis

Huda,

Rustina,

Waluyanti

et al. 2024

Midwifery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric Assessment of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Indonesian Mothers

Cited by 3 publications

References 35 publications

Psychometrics of the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale and short form: a systematic review

Psychometrics of the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale and short form: a systematic review

Can EPDS and EPDS‐3A be used to replace GAD‐7 to screen the anxiety of pregnant women during pregnancy examination?

Psychometric evaluation of the Indonesian version of paternal breastfeeding self-efficacy scale- short form: A confirmatory factor analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About