MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293144733 · doi:10.2196/31996

Effect of Face-to-Face and WhatsApp Communication of a Theory-Based Health Education Intervention on Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy (SeBF Intervention): Cluster Randomized Controlled Field Trial

2022· article· en· W4293144733 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farahana Mohamad Pilus, Norliza Ahmad, Nor Afiah Mohd Zulkefli, Nurul Husna Mohd Shukri

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineSocial cognitive theoryRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Self-efficacyHealth educationCluster randomised controlled trialFamily medicineNursingPsychologyPediatricsPublic healthDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The exclusive breastfeeding rate in Malaysia is still not satisfactory. Previous studies have shown that breastfeeding self-efficacy is one of the determinants of exclusive breastfeeding, and it can be improved using social cognitive theory. WhatsApp, which is widely used among Malaysians, could be leveraged as a platform to deliver health education interventions. Objective This study aimed to develop, implement, and evaluate the effect of using a face-to-face and WhatsApp-based health education intervention based on social cognitive theory, namely the Self-Efficacy in Breastfeeding (SeBF) module, on mothers' self-efficacy, knowledge, and attitudes in a district in Selangor state. Methods This study was a 2-arm, parallel, single-blind, cluster randomized controlled field trial with an intervention and a control group involving primigravida or multigravida mothers who reside in a district in Selangor state and did not exclusively breastfeed during their previous pregnancy. All 12 maternity and pediatric clinics in this district were randomly divided into 6 intervention and 6 control groups. A total of 172 pregnant mothers were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=86) or the control group (n=86). The control group received usual routine care. The primary outcome was breastfeeding self-efficacy, while secondary outcomes were knowledge and attitude toward breastfeeding. Each subject was assessed at 4 time points: at baseline, immediately after the intervention, 4 weeks post partum, and 8 weeks post partum. Generalized mixed model analysis was applied to measure the effect of health education on breastfeeding self-efficacy, knowledge, and attitude after the intervention. Results The response rate was 81% (139/172), with the dropout rate being 7% (6/86) in the intervention group and 31% (27/86) in the control group. In the intent-to-treat analysis, the intervention group showed a significant increase in the mean total breastfeeding self-efficacy score 8 weeks after delivery compared with the control group (F21,601=111.73, P<.001). In addition, the mean total score for breastfeeding knowledge increased significantly in the intervention group after the intervention compared to the control group (F21,601=8.33, P<.001). However, no significant difference was found in the mean total score for breastfeeding attitude after the intervention (F21,602=5.50, P=.47). Conclusions Face-to-face and WhatsApp-based participation in the SeBF program, designed on the basis of social cognitive theory, contributed to improved self-efficacy and knowledge about breastfeeding. Further studies need to be conducted with a longer duration (until 6 months post partum) to evaluate its effectiveness in increasing exclusive breastfeeding. Furthermore, new strategies in health education need to be developed to improve breastfeeding attitudes. Trial Registration Thaiclinicaltrials.org TCTR20200213004; https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20200213004

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207