The Portuguese Version of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale—Short Form
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to translate and psychometrically assess a Portuguese version of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF). The original English version of the BSES-SF was translated to Portuguese and tested among a sample of 89 mothers in southern Brazil from the 2nd to 12th postpartum week followed by face-to-face interviews. The mean total score of the Portuguese version of the BSES-SF was 63.6 +/- 6.22. The reliability analysis of each item in the scale attained significant Cronbach's alphas of 0.63 or superior. The Cronbach's alpha generated by the entire range of 14 questions was 0.71. A factor analysis identified one factor that contributed to 20% of the variance. This study demonstrates that the original English version of the BSES-SF was successfully adapted to Portuguese. The Portuguese version of the BSES-SF constitutes a reliable research instrument for evaluating breastfeeding self-efficacy in Brazil.
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
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".