Health and Sexual Rights: Design, Development, and Assessment of the Massive Open Online Course on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Health Promotion in Brazil

Abstract

Background: Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are a teaching format with universal access and the potential and viability to be implemented by health professionals. Despite their proven success in providing high-quality continuing education, usage and offerings of this technology are still scarce in Brazil. Materials and Methods: This article describes the development of an online-based education strategy (MOOC) on the topic of health policies aimed at the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex (LGBTI+) population and analyzes its performance and reach after 6 months. Results: This introductory MOOC course on LGBTI+ health included an assortment of multimedia material and consisted of 30 h of autonomous learning activities divided into two modules, with problem-based evaluation strategies. During its 6-month promotion period, the course had a total of 3,000 people enrolled with a completion rate of *20%. Conclusions: Results point to a high interest in LGBTI+ health and high demand for training on this topic among health professionals. This was the first course of its kind administered in Brazil. The MOOC format was successful and reliable in enabling the teaching-learning process.

Massive open online courses for nurses’ and healthcare professionals’ continuous education: a scoping review

“…A total of 31 studies was included (Figure 1), published in a 6‐year time span from 2014 (e.g. Harvey et al 2014) to 2020 (Canavese et al 2020) (Table S3). Most of the primary study designs performed to date have been exploratory of one (Chan et al 2015; Fricton et al 2015; Hoedebecke et al 2018; King et al 2014; Pickering & Swinnerton 2017; Scott et al 2019; Sitzman et al 2016; Warugaba et al 2016; Wewer Albrechtsen et al 2017) or more MOOC(s) (Bendezu‐Quispe et al 2017; Liyanagunawardena & Williams 2014; Stark & Pope 2014; Subhi et al 2014), while secondary studies have been based on reviews (Gitlin & Hodgson 2016; Goldberg & Crocombe 2017; Setia et al 2019) and a rapid systematic review (Zubala et al 2019).…”

“…Universities were reported as sole providers in 11 studies (Beer 2019; Fricton et al 2015; Gitlin & Hodgson 2016; Goldberg & Crocombe 2017; Hoedebecke et al 2018; Jia et al 2019; Liyanagunawardena & Williams 2014; Milligan & Littlejohn 2016; Pickering & Swinnerton 2017; Sitzman et al 2016; Subhi et al 2014) and in association with other institutions in 10 studies (Bendezu‐Quispe et al 2017; Canavese et al 2020; Evans et al 2017; King et al 2014; Medina‐Presentado et al 2017; Scott et al 2019; Smith‐Lickess et al 2019; Sneddon et al 2018; Warugaba et al 2016; Zubala et al 2019).…”

“…Only three studies adopted a monodisciplinary approach to MOOCs by involving clinical physiotherapists, student physiotherapists, family doctors and residents (Harvey et al 2014; Harvey et al 2017; Hoedebecke et al 2018). The majority of the MOOCs documented in studies retrieved were addressed to HCPs, including students (Beer 2019; Harvey et al 2014; Harvey et al 2017; Jia et al 2019; Magaña‐Valladares et al 2018b; Milligan & Littlejohn 2016; Pickering & Swinnerton 2017; Subhi et al 2014; Wewer Albrechtsen et al 2017), as well as patients and citizens (Beer 2019; Canavese et al 2020; Charani et al 2019; Evans et al 2017; Fricton et al 2015; Gitlin & Hodgson 2016; Goldberg & Crocombe 2017; Hoedebecke et al 2018; King et al 2014; Liyanagunawardena & Williams 2014). Moreover, only 14 studies (e.g.…”

“…The majority of studies documented the use of a variety of teaching and learning methods (e.g. multimedia materials, interaction, social media; Canavese et al 2020) and thus potentially satisfying different learning styles (Maxwell et al 2018). However, most reported the preferred adoption of a single language (e.g.…”

“…Several MOOC design decisions have also been reported as influencing course effectiveness. A flexible approach capable of (a) accommodating different needs and learning styles (Milligan & Littlejohn 2016), (b) engaging experts (Setia et al 2019), (c) providing careful content selection (Gitlin & Hodgson 2016) and (d) including mixed-methods and educational resources (Canavese et al 2020;Scott et al 2019) has been (Milligan & Littlejohn 2016). Specifically, the following have been reported to increase MOOC effectiveness: -a strong collaborative teamwork including expertise in the content areas, instructional design and technical aspects of MOOC delivery (Sitzman et al 2016) -instructors and designers possessing expertise in using the learning management system and remaining flexible in their approach to problem-solving (e.g.…”