A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties of Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The breastfeeding self-efficacy is one of the psychological factors affecting the duration of breastfeeding; the Breastfeeding self-efficacy measured by the breastfeeding self-efficacy scale-short form (BSES-SF). It was validated and reliable in several studies. The current systematic review aimed to comprehensively review the validity and reliability of the BSES-SF in various versions to give comprehensive information for authorities in this field. Materials and Methods: We searched English databases, including Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Cochran library and Web of Science since inception to May 2018 to find all previously published reports the psychometric dimensions of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy. Two reviewers read independently extracted data assessed. The quality of the studies was carried out by the Consensus-based standards for the selection of health status Measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Results: In this systematic review, reliability was measured using Cronbach’s alpha; inter coefficient of correlation (ICC) as well as an analysis of the item-total correlation. Cronbach’s alpha of breast-feeding self-efficacy for whole scale ranged from 0.76 to 0.95 considered moderate to excellent. Only two studies assessed test-retest reliability. One study reported correlation between two time intervals that was high (r=0.94) and another study measured test-retest reliability using ICC. It was ranged from 0.69 to 0.78 that consider suitable. Item-total correlation ranged from 0.23 to 0.85. Construct validity was tested using factor analysis. Original one- factor structure was confirmed in Spanish, Chinese, American, Canadian, Brazilian and Creation version. Some studies reported four and six –factor structure. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed one-factor structure. Conclusion:Original one- factor structure was confirmed in Spanish, Chinese, American, Canadian, Swedish, and Japanese, creation, Turkish, Portuguese, Brazilian and Creation; version six and four- factor need to further test in future studies. This study provides evidence also that the modified BSES-SF may be a valid and reliable measure of breastfeeding self-efficacy.
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 | 0.020 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".