Dataset Information

Evaluation of a multidisciplinary global health online course in Mexico.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Global Health Education (GHE) focuses on training proactive global citizens to tackle health challenges in an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world. Studies show that health professionals in training have reported that GHE has improved their teamwork, responsiveness to contextual factors that impact health, and understanding of health systems; however, there is little research on the impact of GHE courses in undergraduate settings, especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

Our study analyzes a multidisciplinary online global health course at Tecnologico de Monterrey, México. We conducted a cross-sectional study with pre- and post-design. Students who took the multidisciplinary course of Global Health for Leaders in the Fall of 2019 (n = 153) and Spring of 2020 (n = 348) were selected for this study. Using a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree), the survey assessed seven competencies as well as questions about course expectations, takeaways, and recommendations to improve the course. We performed descriptive statistical analyses comparing the combined pre-tests (from Fall and Spring cohorts) to the combined post-tests. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the samples.

Results

Of the 501 pre-course surveys administered, 456 responses were completed in the pre-course and 435 in the post-course (91% overall response rate). Only 8.7% of the respondents in the pre-course survey strongly agreed that they could describe fundamental aspects of global health such as the Millennium Development Goals or Sustainable Development Goals, in contrast to a 56% of the students who strongly agreed in the post-course survey (p < 0.001). Similar differences were captured in understanding the global burden of disease, social determinants of health, the effects of globalization in health, health systems' goals and functions, and human rights. 38% felt that the course helped them develop a more empathetic perception of the suffering of others experiencing global health-related issues.

Conclusion

In this study, we have presented our experience in teaching an online global health course for multidisciplinary undergraduates in a LMIC. The competencies reported by our students indicate that the course prepared them to confront complex global health issues.

SUBMITTER: Carrasco H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7670103 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have the potential to make a broader educational impact because many learners undertake these courses. Despite their reach, there is a lack of knowledge about which methods are used for evaluating these courses. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this review was to identify current MOOC evaluation methods to inform future study designs. METHODS:We systematically searched the following databases for studies published from January 2008 to October 2018: (1) Scopus, (2) Education Resources Information Center, (3) IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) Xplore, (4) PubMed, (5) Web of Science, (6) British Education Index, and (7) Google Scholar search engine. Two reviewers independently screened the abstracts and titles of the studies. Published studies in the English language that evaluated MOOCs were included. The study design of the evaluations, the underlying motivation for the evaluation studies, data collection, and data analysis methods were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed. The quality of the included studies was appraised using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the National Institutes of Health-National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool for cohort observational studies and for before-after (pre-post) studies with no control group. RESULTS:The initial search resulted in 3275 studies, and 33 eligible studies were included in this review. In total, 16 studies used a quantitative study design, 11 used a qualitative design, and 6 used a mixed methods study design. In all, 16 studies evaluated learner characteristics and behavior, and 20 studies evaluated learning outcomes and experiences. A total of 12 studies used 1 data source, 11 used 2 data sources, 7 used 3 data sources, 4 used 2 data sources, and 1 used 5 data sources. Overall, 3 studies used more than 3 data sources in their evaluation. In terms of the data analysis methods, quantitative methods were most prominent with descriptive and inferential statistics, which were the top 2 preferred methods. In all, 26 studies with a cross-sectional design had a low-quality assessment, whereas RCTs and quasi-experimental studies received a high-quality assessment. CONCLUSIONS:The MOOC evaluation data collection and data analysis methods should be determined carefully on the basis of the aim of the evaluation. The MOOC evaluations are subject to bias, which could be reduced using pre-MOOC measures for comparison or by controlling for confounding variables. Future MOOC evaluations should consider using more diverse data sources and data analysis methods. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR2-10.2196/12087.

Project description:BackgroundClinical training during the COVID-19 pandemic is high risk for medical students. Medical schools in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have limited capacity to develop resources in the face of rapidly developing health emergencies. Here, a free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) was developed as a COVID-19 resource for medical students working in these settings, and its effectiveness was evaluated.MethodsThe RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework was utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of MOOC in teaching medical students about COVID-19. The data sources included the student registration forms, metrics quantifying their interactions within the modules, students' course feedback, and free-text responses. The data were collected from the Moodle learning management system and Google analytics from May 9 to September 15, 2020. The research team analyzed the quantitative data descriptively and the qualitative data thematically.ResultsAmong the 16,237 unique visitors who accessed the course, only 6031 medical students from 71 medical schools registered, and about 4993 (83% of registrants) completed the course, indicating high levels of satisfaction (M = 8.17, SD = 1.49) on a 10-point scale. The mean scores of each assessment modules were > 90%. The free-text responses from 987 unique students revealed a total of 17 themes (e.g., knowing the general information on COVID-19, process management of the pandemic in public health, online platform use, and instructional design) across the elements of the RE-AIM framework. Mainly, the students characterized the MOOC as well-organized and effective.ConclusionsMedical students learned about COVID-19 using a self-paced and unmonitored MOOC. MOOCs could play a vital role in the dissemination of accurate information to medical students in LMIC in future public health emergencies. The students were interested in using similar MOOCs in the future.

Project description:BackgroundThis study assesses the impact of the Interprofessional Global Health Course (IPGHC) on students' fundamental global health knowledge and personal viewpoints on global health domains. It explores the evolution of students' understanding of global health specifically in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsNinety-nine students were selected from 123 McGill student applicants based on their motivation and commitment to take part in IPGHC's ten-week 2020 curriculum. These IPGHC students were eligible to participate in the study. The study's design is sequential explanatory mixed methods. The cross-sectional survey (quantitative phase) appraises students' global health learning outcomes using pre- and post-course surveys, with the use of 5-point Likert-scale questions. The descriptive qualitative survey (qualitative phase) further explores the impact of IPGHC on student's understanding of global health and the reflections of students on the COVID-19 pandemic after IPGHC. The post-course survey included a course evaluation for quality improvement purposes.ResultsOf the 99 students, 81 students across multiple undergraduate and graduate disciplines participated in the study by completing the course surveys. Mean knowledge scores of the following 11 global health topics were increased between pre- and post-course survey: Canadian Indigenous health (P < 0.001), global burden of disease (P < 0.001), global surgery (P < 0.001), infectious diseases and neglected tropical diseases (P < 0.001), refugee and immigrant health (P < 0.001), research and development of drugs (P < 0.001), role of politics and policies in global health (P = 0.02), role of technology in global health (P < 0.001), sexual violence (P < 0.001), systemic racism in healthcare (P = 0.03), and trauma in the global health context (P < 0.001). A positive change in student viewpoints was observed in response to questions regarding their perception of the importance of global health education in their own professional health care programs (P < 0.001), and their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of other healthcare professionals (P < 0.001). In the post-course survey open-ended questions, students exemplified their knowledge gained during the course to create a more informed definition of global health. Several recurring themes were identified in the student reflections on the COVID-19 pandemic, notably policy and politics, followed by access to healthcare and resources.ConclusionThis study emphasizes the need for interprofessional global health education at the university level and demonstrates how rapidly global health learners can apply their knowledge to evolving contexts like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:Longitudinal and collaborative global health research curricula to train a well-versed global health corps through skills building in assessment and evaluation are lacking. A without-walls research curriculum was offered to medical and public health students between 2007 and 2015. Mentored cross-disciplinary research projects were developed and implemented in partnership with communities. A multilevel mixed methods design, including semi-structured interviews, post-curriculum surveys, presentations, publications, postgraduation metrics, and feedback from project sites, evaluated educational outcomes. Students (N = 25; aged 27 ± 1.9 years; 90.5% female) participated in the studies in 12 countries, resulting in 26 national-level presentations and 24 peer-reviewed publications, including per student average and range of Institutional Review Board submission (0.95; 0-3), poster presentation (0.85; 0-3), oral presentation (0.65; 0-2), and peer-reviewed submission (1.05; 0-4). On average, the studies (40% mixed methods) lasted 2 years. Analyses and manuscript writing were the most challenging; data collection and presentations were the most rewarding. Majority of the participants strongly agreed with achieving skills in community engagement, interviewing techniques, research design and implementation, research dissemination, and career development. Interview themes included expectations and learning goals, effective mentorship, impact on career goals, and ethical learning. Mentorship qualities were accessibility, real-time problem solving, research expertise, advocate, and balancing guidance with independence. Project sites' feedback was overwhelmingly positive regarding the projects' impact. Postgraduation participants hold positions in humanitarian organizations, research programs serving the underserved, and primary care residencies, fellowships, and faculty. This experience illustrates the feasibility and effectiveness of mentored global health research and underlines the crucial link between community collaboration and scholarship for effective global health practice.

Project description:IntroductionPostgraduate medical trainees (PGs) in developing nations face various educational hurdles due to limited access to quality resources and training facilities. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of e-learning, particularly Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), within postgraduate medical education. It involved the development of a customized online course focused on osteoporosis for PGs and an examination of their perspectives and preferences concerning online learning methods like Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) platforms.MethodsThe study was conducted from January 2018 to December 2020. A multi-institutional, multidisciplinary team was assembled to design an osteoporosis course on the VLE platform. PGs (n = 9) from diverse disciplines and institutions were selected with informed consent. Focus group discussions (FGDs) among these PGs identified their preferences for the online course, which subsequently guided the development of the MOOC. The modular MOOC comprised recorded micro-lectures, flashcards, videos, case challenges, and expert interviews. The educational impact of the VLE was assessed using pre- and post-module tests among the participants, and their perceptions of the PGs and course facilitators were gathered via an online survey.ResultsThe study identified the involvement of PGs in the course design process as beneficial, as it allowed for content customization and boosted their motivation for peer-to-peer learning. During the FGDs, PGs expressed a strong preference for flexible learning formats, particularly short downloadable presentations, and micro-lectures. They also identified challenges related to technology, institutional support, and internet connectivity. In the subsequently customized MOOC course, 66% of PGs (n = 6) attempted the pre-test, achieving a mean score of 43.8%. Following the VLE module, all PGs (n = 9) successfully passed the end-of-module test, averaging a score of 96%, highlighting its impact on learning. The majority (n = 8, 88.9%) agreed that the course content could be applied in clinical practice, and 66.7% (n = 6) expressed extreme satisfaction with the learning objectives and content. Participants favoured end-of-module assessments and the use of best-choice questions for evaluation.ConclusionThis study highlights the importance of virtual learning, particularly MOOCs, in addressing the educational challenges faced by developing nations. It emphasizes the need for tailored online courses that cater to the preferences and requirements of PGs. The findings suggest that MOOCs can foster collaboration, networking, and opportunities for professional development, and interdisciplinary collaboration among faculty members can be a key strength in course development. This research provides valuable insights for educators, institutions, and e-learning developers seeking to enhance their teaching methodologies and establish accessible educational environments in the digital age.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The digital revolution has led to a boom in the number of available online health care resources. To navigate these resources successfully, digital literacy education is required. Learners who can evaluate the reliability and validity of online health care information are likely to be more effective at avoiding potentially dangerous misinformation. In addition to providing health care education, massive open online courses (MOOCs) are well positioned to play a role in providing digital literacy education in this context. OBJECTIVE:This study focused on learners enrolled in a MOOC on cancer genomics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a series of digital literacy-related activities within this course. This was an iterative study, with changes made to digital literacy-related activities in 4 of the 8 runs of the course. METHODS:This mixed methods study focused on learner engagement with the digital literacy-related activities, including the final course written assignment. Quantitative data including the number of references listed in each written assignment were compared between successive runs. Qualitative data in the form of learner comments on discussion forums for digital literacy-related tasks were evaluated to determine the impact of these educational activities. RESULTS:Using the number of references included for each final course assignment as an indicator of digital literacy skills, the digital literacy-related activities in the final 2 runs were judged to be the most successful. We found a statistically significant increase in the number of references cited by learners in their final written assignments. The average number of references cited in Run 8 was significantly higher (3.5) than in Run 1 (1.8) of the MOOC (P=.001). Learner comments in Runs 7 and 8 showed that a poll in which learners were asked to select which of 4 online resources was reliable was effective in stimulating learner discussion about how to evaluate resource reliability. CONCLUSIONS:Similar to many health care MOOCs, the course studied here had a heterogeneous group of learners, including patients (and their families), the public, health care students, and practitioners. Carefully designing a range of digital literacy-related activities that would be beneficial to this heterogenous group of learners enabled learners to become more effective at evaluating and citing appropriate online resources within their written assignments.