Dataset Information

A questionnaire for assessing breastfeeding intentions and practices in Nigeria: validity, reliability and translation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Validating a questionnaire/instrument (whether developed or adapted) before proceeding to the field for data collection is important. This article presents the modification of an Irish questionnaire for a Nigerian setting. The validation process and reliability testing of this questionnaire (which was used in assessing previous breastfeeding practices and breastfeeding intentions of pregnant women in English and Hausa languages) were also presented.

Method

Five experts in the field of breastfeeding and infant feeding voluntarily and independently evaluated the instrument. The experts evaluated the various items of the questionnaire based on relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity on a Likert scale of 4. The analysis was performed to determine the content validity index (CVI).Two language experts performed the translation and back-translation. Ten pregnant women completed questionnaires which were evaluated for internal consistency. Two other pregnant women completed the questionnaire twice at an interval of two weeks to test the reliability. SPSS version 21 was used to calculate the coefficient of reliability.

Results

The content validity index was high (0.94 for relevance, clarity and ambiguity and 0.96 for simplicity). The analysis suggested that four of the seventy one items should be removed. Cronbach's Alpha was 0.81, while the reliability coefficient was 0.76. The emerged validated questionnaire was translated from English to Hausa, then, back-translated into English and compared for accuracy.

Conclusion

The final instrument is reliable and valid for data collection on breastfeeding in Nigeria among English and Hausa speakers. Therefore, the instrument is recommended for use in assessing breastfeeding intention and practices in Nigeria.

SUBMITTER: Emmanuel A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5463374 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A questionnaire for assessing breastfeeding intentions and practices in Nigeria: validity, reliability and translation.

Emmanuel Andy A Clow Sheila E SE

BMC pregnancy and childbirth 20170607 1

<h4>Background</h4>Validating a questionnaire/instrument (whether developed or adapted) before proceeding to the field for data collection is important. This article presents the modification of an Irish questionnaire for a Nigerian setting. The validation process and reliability testing of this questionnaire (which was used in assessing previous breastfeeding practices and breastfeeding intentions of pregnant women in English and Hausa languages) were also presented.<h4>Method</h4>Five experts ...[more]

PMID: 28592252

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are few reliable and valid tools to assess lactation and infant feeding knowledge and practices. This study tested the psychometric properties of two new scales, the Newborn Feeding Ability (NFA) questionnaire and Breastfeeding Initiation Practices (BIP) scale to assess midwives' breastfeeding knowledge and practices specific to breastfeeding initiation.MethodsA national postal survey of Australian midwives (n = 3500) was conducted in October 2001. Reliability was determined through Cronbach's alpha coefficient and stability determined by a test-retest. Content validity was established through a critical review of literature and review by an expert panel. Construct validity was informed by an exploratory factor analysis and principle component analysis with varimax rotation. Correlations between NFA and BKQ knowledge subscale scores and BIP and BKQ practice subscale scores assessed criterion validity. A multiple hierarchical regression analysis determined predictive validity of the NFA and BIP.ResultsA response rate of 31.6% (n = 1107) was achieved. Adequate internal consistency was established for both instruments. Five factors on the NFA questionnaire were congruent with knowledge about effects of skin-to-skin contact, physiological stability, newborn innate abilities, work practices and effective breastfeeding. The BIP revealed three factors related to observing pre-feeding behavior, mother/baby care and attachment and positioning practices. Predictive validity of knowledge was moderate (r = 0.481, p < 0.01) and contributed to 31.5% of variance in reported practice. Midwives with high knowledge scores were more likely to report best practice when assisting mothers to initiate breastfeeding. Midwives with more personal breastfeeding experience scored higher on all scales.ConclusionThe Newborn Feeding Ability questionnaire and the Breastfeeding Initiation Practices scale can contribute to practice development by assessing lactation and infant feeding knowledge and practice deficits. Individual learning needs can be identified, and effectiveness of education interventions evaluated using these tools. Further testing is required with other samples of midwives and health professionals involved in the promotion of breastfeeding.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) claims to assess disrupted self-perception of the back. The aim of this study was to develop a German version of the FreBAQ (FreBAQ-G) and assess its test-retest reliability, its known-groups validity and its convergent validity with another purported measure of back perception. METHODS:The FreBaQ-G was translated following international guidelines for the transcultural adaptation of questionnaires. Thirty-five patients with non-specific CLBP and 48 healthy participants were recruited. Assessor one administered the FreBAQ-G to each patient with CLBP on two separate days to quantify intra-observer reliability. Assessor two administered the FreBaQ-G to each patient on day 1. The scores were compared to those obtained by assessor one on day 1 to assess inter-observer reliability. Known-groups validity was quantified by comparing the FreBAQ-G score between patients and healthy controls. To assess convergent validity, patient's FreBAQ-G scores were correlated to their two-point discrimination (TPD) scores. RESULTS:Intra- and Inter-observer reliability were both moderate with ICC3.1 = 0.88 (95%CI: 0.77 to 0.94) and 0.89 (95%CI: 0.79 to 0.94), respectively. Intra- and inter-observer limits of agreement (LoA) were 6.2 (95%CI: 5.0-8.1) and 6.0 (4.8-7.8), respectively. The adjusted mean difference between patients and controls was 5.4 (95%CI: 3.0 to 7.8, p<0.01). Patient's FreBAQ-G scores were not associated with TPD thresholds (Pearson's r = -0.05, p = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS:The FreBAQ-G demonstrated a degree of reliability and known-groups validity. Interpretation of patient level data should be performed with caution because the LoA were substantial. It did not demonstrate convergent validity against TPD. Floor effects of some items of the FreBAQ-G may have influenced the validity and reliability results. The clinimetric properties of the FreBAQ-G require further investigation as a simple measure of disrupted self-perception of the back before firm recommendations on its use can be made.

Dataset Information

A questionnaire for assessing breastfeeding intentions and practices in Nigeria: validity, reliability and translation.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A questionnaire for assessing breastfeeding intentions and practices in Nigeria: validity, reliability and translation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure