MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Psychometric Properties of the Breastfeeding Self‐Efficacy Scale‐ Short Form in an Ethnically Diverse U.K. Sample

2008· article· en· W1991282154 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Gregory, Kate Penrose, Claire L. Morrison, Cindy‐Lee Dennis, Christine MacArthur

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Nursing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingCronbach's alphaMedicineEthnic groupPostpartum periodEthnically diverseBreast feedingPsychometricsDemographyObstetricsPsychologyClinical psychologyPregnancyPopulationPediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To psychometrically assess the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF) among a multicultural U.K. sample and to examine the relationship between breastfeeding self-efficacy and maternal demographic variables. DESIGN: A cohort study where breastfeeding women completed questionnaires in-hospital and at 4 weeks postpartum. SAMPLE: 165 breastfeeding women at the maternity ward in Birmingham Women's Hospital inpatient department. MEASUREMENTS: BSES-SF. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha co-efficient was .90 and evidence for predictive validity was demonstrated through exclusively breastfeeding mothers at 4 weeks postpartum having significantly higher in-hospital BSES-SF scores (M=49.4, SD=12.9) than mothers who were partially breastfeeding (M=44.7, SD=9.5) or bottle-feeding, M=42.4, SD=11.7; F(2)=1.62, p<.001. Caucasian mothers had significantly lower mean scores (M=44.4, SD=12.1) than those of other ethnicity, M=48.4, SD=12.9, t(163)=-2.06, p=.04. CONCLUSIONS: This study builds upon previous research and provides additional evidence suggesting that the BSES-SF has sound psychometric properties and can be utilized among diverse samples, including Southeast Asian mothers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
grokno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
opusno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Methods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health NursingSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207