Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Apr 3;20(1):25.
doi: 10.1186/s13006-025-00715-7.

Development and validation of a novel self-assessment tool for breastfeeding mothers

Chengsi Ong  1 , See Ling Loy  2   3 , Cynthia Pang  4 , Sharon Lee  4 , Shamini Krishnan  4 , Jin Ting Tan  4 , Daniel Chan  3   5   6 , Chee Wai Ku  2   3 , Jerry Kok Yen Chan  2   3 , Fabian Yap  3   5   6 , Mei Chien Chua  3   7
Affiliations

Development and validation of a novel self-assessment tool for breastfeeding mothers

Chengsi Ong et al. Int Breastfeed J. .

Abstract

Background: Difficulties with breastfeeding can lead to early breastfeeding cessation. Empowering mothers through self-assessment and education of breastfeeding skills can help support them. We aimed to develop and validate a tool for self-screening and education on breastfeeding skills.

Methods: A six-item tool was developed through literature review and expert interviews, covering domains of breastfeeding position, nipple shape, breast engorgement, infant latch, swallowing and intake. Eight experts assessed the tool's relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity. Scores were used to determine item-level content validity index (I-CVI) and scale-level content validity index (S-CVI). Items with values ≤ 0.83 (best possible score = 1.00) were revised. Following revision, a convenience sample of breastfeeding mothers were recruited from maternity wards and clinics to determine the tool's internal consistency, face, criterion and construct validity. Participants and lactation consultants (LC) independently completed the tool based on the same breastfeeding episode. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing participant and LC scores using Bland-Altman plots. Construct validity was determined by comparing scores in participants who were and were not referred to a LC. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine a cut-off score for LC referral by optimizing sensitivity and specificity.

Results: The tool demonstrated acceptable content validity, with I-CVI and S-CVI values for relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity above the threshold, except for S-CVI of simplicity and ambiguity, and the tool was revised accordingly. Most mothers who completed the tool (n = 58) found it easy to understand (87.9%), relevant (91.4%) and useful (86.2%). Cronbach's alpha was 0.66, which improved to 0.74 with the removal of the item on "engorgement". With the remaining five items, ROC analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.79 [(95%CI 0.67-0.90), p < 0.001], with a score of ≤ 6 indicative of an LC referral (sensitivity = 86%, specificity = 55%). Bland-Altman plots showed acceptable agreement between participant and LC scores with a mean difference of 0.22 (95%CI -3.02-3.47).

Conclusions: We developed and validated a simple five-item tool for mothers to assess and be educated about breastfeeding skills. Further study on the tool's predictive validity and effectiveness within a clinical pathway is warranted.

Keywords: Breastfeeding; Breastfeeding assessment; Screening tool; Validity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethics approval was obtained from the Singhealth Centralized Institutional Review Board (CIRB Ref: 2022/2428) with written informed consent from participants. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Breakdown of participant responses on the breastfeeding education and screening tool
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Receiver operating characteristic curve for scores of participants referred to lactation consultant
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bland-Altman of lactation consultant vs. participant scores. Legend: LC, Lactation consultant
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Dieterich CM, Felice JP, O’Sullivan E, Rasmussen KM. Breastfeeding and health outcomes for the mother-infant dyad. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2013;60(1):31–48. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Victora CG, Bahl R, Barros AJD, França GVA, Horton S, Krasevec J, et al. Breastfeeding in the 21st century: epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect. Lancet. 2016;387(10017):475–90. - PubMed
    1. Chua L, Win AM. Prevalence of breastfeeding in Singapore. Stat Singap Newsl. 2013;10:15.
    1. Odom EC, Li R, Scanlon KS, Perrine CG, Grummer-Strawn L. Reasons for earlier than desired cessation of breastfeeding. Pediatrics. 2013;131(3):e726–32. - PMC - PubMed
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services. The surgeon general’s call to action to support breastfeeding. Rockville (MD): Office of the Surgeon General (US); 2011. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types