孕妇母乳喂养健康知识量表:量表开发研究。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2024-09-25 DOI:10.1111/jep.14147
Asibe Ozkan, Eda Aktas, Melike Dissiz, Zehra Acar, Bahar Karakoç
{"title":"孕妇母乳喂养健康知识量表:量表开发研究。","authors":"Asibe Ozkan, Eda Aktas, Melike Dissiz, Zehra Acar, Bahar Karakoç","doi":"10.1111/jep.14147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale, aims, and objective: </strong>Breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition for infants, and health literacy significantly influences breastfeeding rates. This study aimed to develop a tool to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This methodologically structured study was conducted with 590 pregnant women who visited the pregnancy follow-up clinic between January and April 2024 and met the sampling criteria. Data were collected using a participant form and the Health Literacy Scale for Breastfeeding for Pregnant Women (BFHLS). To assess the BFHLS validity, the content validity index (CVI) and factor analysis were used, while the reliability was evaluated using the test-retest method, item-total score correlation, and Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The BFHLS for pregnant women is structured into four dimensions, comprising 25 items. To assess the scale's stability, test-retest measurements were conducted with a minimum interval of 2 weeks, revealing no significant difference in mean scores (p > 0.05). The CVI for each item was 99%. The corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.48 to 0.92, and Cronbach's alpha value was determined to be 0.96.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BFHLS developed for pregnant women is a valid and reliable tool. Higher scores on the scale indicate a greater level of breastfeeding health literacy in pregnant women. This scale can effectively be used to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.</p>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breastfeeding health literacy scale for pregnant women: A scale development study.\",\"authors\":\"Asibe Ozkan, Eda Aktas, Melike Dissiz, Zehra Acar, Bahar Karakoç\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jep.14147\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale, aims, and objective: </strong>Breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition for infants, and health literacy significantly influences breastfeeding rates. This study aimed to develop a tool to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This methodologically structured study was conducted with 590 pregnant women who visited the pregnancy follow-up clinic between January and April 2024 and met the sampling criteria. Data were collected using a participant form and the Health Literacy Scale for Breastfeeding for Pregnant Women (BFHLS). To assess the BFHLS validity, the content validity index (CVI) and factor analysis were used, while the reliability was evaluated using the test-retest method, item-total score correlation, and Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The BFHLS for pregnant women is structured into four dimensions, comprising 25 items. To assess the scale's stability, test-retest measurements were conducted with a minimum interval of 2 weeks, revealing no significant difference in mean scores (p > 0.05). The CVI for each item was 99%. The corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.48 to 0.92, and Cronbach's alpha value was determined to be 0.96.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BFHLS developed for pregnant women is a valid and reliable tool. Higher scores on the scale indicate a greater level of breastfeeding health literacy in pregnant women. This scale can effectively be used to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.14147\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.14147","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

理由、目的和目标:母乳喂养可为婴儿提供最佳营养,而健康素养对母乳喂养率有很大影响。本研究旨在开发一种工具来评估孕妇的母乳喂养健康知识水平:本研究采用结构化方法,对 2024 年 1 月至 4 月期间到孕期随访门诊就诊且符合抽样标准的 590 名孕妇进行了调查。数据收集采用参与者表格和孕妇母乳喂养健康知识量表(BFHLS)。为了评估 BFHLS 的有效性,使用了内容效度指数(CVI)和因子分析,而可靠性则使用了重测法、项目-总分相关性和 Cronbach's alpha 信度系数进行评估:孕妇BFHLS分为四个维度,共有25个项目。为了评估量表的稳定性,我们进行了至少间隔 2 周的重测,结果显示平均得分无显著差异(P > 0.05)。每个项目的 CVI 均为 99%。校正后的项目-总相关系数在 0.48 至 0.92 之间,Cronbach's alpha 值为 0.96:为孕妇开发的 BFHLS 是一种有效且可靠的工具。该量表的得分越高,表明孕妇的母乳喂养健康知识水平越高。该量表可有效用于评估孕妇的母乳喂养健康知识水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Breastfeeding health literacy scale for pregnant women: A scale development study.

Rationale, aims, and objective: Breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition for infants, and health literacy significantly influences breastfeeding rates. This study aimed to develop a tool to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.

Methods: This methodologically structured study was conducted with 590 pregnant women who visited the pregnancy follow-up clinic between January and April 2024 and met the sampling criteria. Data were collected using a participant form and the Health Literacy Scale for Breastfeeding for Pregnant Women (BFHLS). To assess the BFHLS validity, the content validity index (CVI) and factor analysis were used, while the reliability was evaluated using the test-retest method, item-total score correlation, and Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient.

Results: The BFHLS for pregnant women is structured into four dimensions, comprising 25 items. To assess the scale's stability, test-retest measurements were conducted with a minimum interval of 2 weeks, revealing no significant difference in mean scores (p > 0.05). The CVI for each item was 99%. The corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.48 to 0.92, and Cronbach's alpha value was determined to be 0.96.

Conclusion: The BFHLS developed for pregnant women is a valid and reliable tool. Higher scores on the scale indicate a greater level of breastfeeding health literacy in pregnant women. This scale can effectively be used to assess the breastfeeding health literacy levels of pregnant women.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
期刊最新文献
Adaptation of the health literacy survey19-Europe-Q12 into Turkish culture: A psychometric study. The effect of preadmission education given to bariatric surgery patients on postoperative recovery: A randomized controlled study. What is the probability that higher versus lower quality of evidence represents true effects estimates? Effect of evidence-based nursing practices on individualised care: A cross-sectional descriptive study. Mastering meta-analysis in Microsoft Excel with MetaXL add-in: A comprehensive tutorial and guide to meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1