ArticleBMJ open2019
Study design and protocol for a comprehensive evaluation of a UK massive open online course (MOOC) on quality improvement in healthcare.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-Designing and Evaluating a 1-Day Quality Improvement Workshop for Medical Students and Resident Physicians: Tutorial on Applying Kern's Curriculum Development Framework.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Patient-Centered Education Through A Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) for Patients With Multiple Myeloma and Caregivers: Descriptive Study of Knowledge Gains by French Association of Patients With Multiple Myeloma (AF3M) and French-Speaking Myeloma Intergroup (IFM).JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Transforming improvement training at scale with essential digital training skills.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Evaluative study of a MOOC on knowledge translation in five French-speaking countries.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Building lean improvement sckills at scale: an evaluation of a massive open online course in the English NHS.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Article
- Teaching LGBTQ+ Health, a Web-Based Faculty Development Course: Program Evaluation Study Using the RE-AIM Framework.JMIR medical education · 2023Article
- Article
- Science Popularization Education regarding Oral Health-General Health for Nonmedical Undergraduates Applying a SPOC Teaching Model.Disease markers · 2022Article
- Effects of Online Mental Health Classes on Mental Health and Stigma: a Controlled Before-After Study with 1-Month Follow-Up.SN comprehensive clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMassive open online courses (MOOCs) offer a flexible approach to online and distance learning, and are growing in popularity. Several MOOCs are now available, to help learners build on their knowledge in a number of healthcare topics. More research is needed to determine the effectiveness of MOOCs as an online education tool, and explore their long-term impact on learners' professional practice. We present a protocol describing the design of comprehensive, mixed-methods evaluation of a MOOC, ' METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pre-post study design using quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to evaluate the QI MOOC. Different elements of the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness and maintenance) and Kirkpatrick (reaction, learning and behaviour) models will be used to guide the evaluation. All learners who register for the course will be invited to participate in the QI MOOC evaluation study. Those who consent will be asked to complete a presurvey to assess baseline QI knowledge (self-report and objective) and perceived confidence in engaging in QI activities. On completion of the course, participants will complete a postsurvey measuring again knowledge and perceived confidence. Feedback on the course content and how it can be improved. A subset of participants will be invited to take part in a follow-up qualitative interview, 3 months after taking the course, to explore in depth how the MOOC impacted their behaviour in practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the University of Bath Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: 2958). Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, and disseminated at conference and departmental presentations, and more widely using social media, microblogging sites and periodicals aimed at healthcare professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.