ArticleJMIR cardio2026
A Massive Open Online Course for Primary Prevention of Stroke: Evaluation of Co-Design Process.
Article in JMIR cardio, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Public awareness and understanding of stroke are crucial to reducing its overall burden. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are free, self-directed online learning platforms that provide accessible education. Objective: This study aimed to describe the process, outcomes, and evaluation of co-designing the Preventing Stroke MOOC. Methods: The co-design process was conducted with various stakeholder groups from July 2020 to December 2024 in Australia over three phases: (1) predesign, (2) co-design, and (3) postdesign. In the predesign phase, we consulted with MOOC researchers and held a half-day in-person workshop with community members to prioritize the stroke prevention topics, structure, format, and features, followed by user testing of a single developed module. The larger study comprised 16 virtual focus groups (14 co-design and 2 user testing focus groups) with community members and health knowledge experts. Of the 14 co-design focus groups, 12 informed the MOOC design, including content, structure, and delivery. This was followed by drafting content for each module, expert review (eg, clinicians and researchers), and development of platform materials. In the postdesign phase, we conducted user testing to collect feedback and evaluated the co-design process to determine how participants' input shaped the final MOOC design. Results: In the predesign phase, 5 MOOC experts and community members contributed to a pilot module comprising 9 pages on the prioritized topics, including a focus on stories from people with lived experience of stroke. A total of 8 people tested this module, providing positive feedback about content and delivery. The co-design phase engaged 22 participants across 12 focus groups relevant to the MOOC. Their suggestions contributed to the multimedia design of the 7 core modules, with personalization via 9 optional mini-modules. Feedback on technical issues and suggested improvements identified during postdesign user testing were resolved. Evaluation of the MOOC co-design process found that the majority of participants' suggestions gathered during the co-design phase were included in the final MOOC. Conclusions: A structured, co-design process resulted in the Preventing Stroke MOOC reflecting participants' suggestions and provided important insights on the educational information needed to inform the general population about stroke prevention.
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.