4.7 Article

Validation of the Breastfeeding Score-A Simple Screening Tool to Predict Breastfeeding Duration

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 11, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11122852

Keywords

breastfeeding; infant; parity; maternal behavior; educational status; self-efficacy; risk factors; prognosis; sensitivity and specificity; practice

Funding

  1. Health Insurance Foundation [2003B045]
  2. Lundbeck Foundation [FP10]
  3. TrygFonden's Centre for Child Research [18480]
  4. Det Obelske Familiefond [27951]
  5. Lauridsen Fonden [32948]
  6. Innovation Fund Denmark [5155-00001B]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Easy to use screening tools to identify mothers in risk of early breastfeeding cessation are needed. The purpose was to validate a revised version of the breastfeeding score, consisting of four questions addressing completed education, earlier breastfeeding duration, self-efficacy, and sense of security not knowing the exact amount of milk the baby ingests. We used two cohorts from 2004 (n = 633) and 2017 (n = 579) to explore the predictive validity of the breastfeeding score to identify mothers at risk of breastfeeding cessation within the first 17 weeks postpartum. The analyses included sensitivity and specificity, clinically relevant cut-points, and calibrations plots. A cut-point >= 5 points identified 61% of first-time and 42% of multiparous mothers in the validation cohort 2017 to be at risk of early breastfeeding cessation with a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 60% for first-time, and 69% and 82% for multiparous, respectively. The corresponding numbers in the 2004 cohort were almost identical. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were 0.77 and 0.78 and the calibration plots showed good agreement for the two cohorts. The breastfeeding score indicated good ability to discriminate between mothers at risk of early exclusive breastfeeding cessation. The simple form of the tool makes it easy to use in daily practice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available