Psychometric Assessment of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Indonesian Mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF) in Indonesian postpartum women. We conducted a cross-sectional study including 237 postpartum women in Yogyakarta City, Indonesia. Participants completed the BSES-SF, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Construct validity, internal reliability, and divergent validity were examined using confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha, and Pearson’s correlations. We identified a unidimensional structure through confirmatory factor analysis with an excellent internal consistency by Cronbach’s alpha of .90. Divergent validity was evidenced by low correlation of the BSES-SF with the depressive symptoms (EPDS, r = −.21; HADS-D, r = −.17, p < .05) and anxiety symptoms (HADS-A, r = −.15, p = .02). It is concluded that the Indonesian version of BSES-SF is a valid and reliable measurement tool to assess breastfeeding self-efficacy among postpartum women.
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 | 0.006 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".