<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.0 20040830//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/2.0/journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JME</journal-id>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">JMIR Med Educ</journal-id>
      <journal-title>JMIR Medical Education</journal-title>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2369-3762</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>JMIR Publications</publisher-name>
        <publisher-loc>Toronto, Canada</publisher-loc>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">v12i1e90827</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="pmid">42229886</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2196/90827</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
          <subject>Original Paper</subject>
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="article-type">
          <subject>Original Paper</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Learning Participation and Performance Among Social and Academic Learners in a Nursing Massive Open Online Course: Retrospective Cohort Study</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="editor">
          <name>
            <surname>Gladman</surname>
            <given-names>Tehmina</given-names>
          </name>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="reviewer">
          <name>
            <surname>Schlosser</surname>
            <given-names>Tobias</given-names>
          </name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="reviewer">
          <name>
            <surname>Funghetto</surname>
            <given-names>Silvana</given-names>
          </name>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib id="contrib1" contrib-type="author" equal-contrib="yes">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Zeng</surname>
            <given-names>Jianqing</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff">1</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8900-1088</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib2" contrib-type="author" equal-contrib="yes">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Li</surname>
            <given-names>Kun</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>PhD</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff">1</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0092-7178</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib3" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            <given-names>Wenxuan</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff">1</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0171-7639</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib4" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Xiao</surname>
            <given-names>Lingjun</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0064-9526</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib5" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            <given-names>Yingmin</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2727-0134</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib6" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>He</surname>
            <given-names>Xinghui</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>BS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9512-1301</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib7" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Qing</surname>
            <given-names>Yonghong</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7542-0339</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib8" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Xue</surname>
            <given-names>Jingjing</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>MS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5021-7959</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib9" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Zhong</surname>
            <given-names>Lirong</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>BS</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8579-1918</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib10" contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Yan</surname>
            <given-names>Tiebin</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>PhD</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0489-5142</ext-link>
        </contrib>
        <contrib id="contrib11" contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Zheng</surname>
            <given-names>Xiuyuan</given-names>
          </name>
          <degrees>PhD</degrees>
          <xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff">2</xref>
          <address>
            <institution>Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University</institution>
            <addr-line>107 Yanjiang West Road</addr-line>
            <addr-line>Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510120</addr-line>
            <country>China</country>
            <phone>86 02081332880</phone>
            <email>zhengxy27@mail.sysu.edu.cn</email>
          </address>
          <ext-link ext-link-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2042-1278</ext-link>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="aff1">
        <label>1</label>
        <institution>School of Nursing, Sun Yat-sen University</institution>
        <addr-line>Guangzhou</addr-line>
        <country>China</country>
      </aff>
      <aff id="aff2">
        <label>2</label>
        <institution>Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University</institution>
        <addr-line>Guangzhou</addr-line>
        <country>China</country>
      </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <corresp>Corresponding Author: Xiuyuan Zheng <email>zhengxy27@mail.sysu.edu.cn</email></corresp>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection">
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub">
        <day>2</day>
        <month>6</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>12</volume>
      <elocation-id>e90827</elocation-id>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>4</day>
          <month>1</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="rev-request">
          <day>5</day>
          <month>3</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="rev-recd">
          <day>25</day>
          <month>4</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>3</day>
          <month>5</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <copyright-statement>©Jianqing Zeng, Kun Li, Wenxuan Wang, Lingjun Xiao, Yingmin Wang, Xinghui He, Yonghong Qing, Jingjing Xue, Lirong Zhong, Tiebin Yan, Xiuyuan Zheng. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (https://mededu.jmir.org), 02.06.2026.</copyright-statement>
      <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
        <p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Education, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mededu.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.</p>
      </license>
      <self-uri xlink:href="https://mededu.jmir.org/2026/1/e90827" xlink:type="simple"/>
      <abstract>
        <sec sec-type="background">
          <title>Background</title>
          <p>Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are increasingly used in nursing education, attracting learners with diverse participation modes. Social learners (self-directed) enroll voluntarily based on personal interests, while academic learners (institution-directed) are mandated by nursing schools, with performance linked to grades. Existing literature shows that academic learners outperform social learners in MOOCs, but evidence is scarce on whether this performance gap stems from distinct participation patterns shaped by institutional requirements.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec sec-type="objective">
          <title>Objective</title>
          <p>We sought to compare participation typologies between social and academic learners using latent class analysis (LCA) and assess their association with learning outcomes.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec sec-type="methods">
          <title>Methods</title>
          <p>A retrospective analysis was conducted of 8222 students enrolled in a rehabilitation nursing MOOC from 2021 to 2022. Learners were classified by topic test participation frequency via LCA, and their distributions and scores were statistically compared.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec sec-type="results">
          <title>Results</title>
          <p>The cohort comprised 7683 (93.4%) academic and 539 (6.6%) social learners. LCA identified 3 participation types: participation-declining (93/8222, 1.1%), high-participation (6959/8222, 84.6%), and lowest-participation (1170/8222, 14.2%). The distributions of participation types differed significantly between groups (<italic>χ</italic><sup>2</sup>=2745.1; <italic>df</italic>=2; <italic>P</italic>&#60;.001). Most social learners belonged to the lowest-participation group (482/539, 89.4%), whereas most academic learners belonged to the high-participation group (6923/7683, 90.1%). Among high-participation learners, academic learners significantly outperformed social learners (all <italic>P</italic>&#60;.05; <italic>r=</italic>0.06-0.10). No significant between-group differences were observed for the other participation types (all <italic>P</italic>&#62;.05).</p>
        </sec>
        <sec sec-type="conclusions">
          <title>Conclusions</title>
          <p>Distinct participation patterns were associated with the performance advantage of academic learners. Our findings highlight the importance of sustained participation, suggesting that MOOC instructors should provide enhanced support for voluntary learners.</p>
        </sec>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>massive open online courses</kwd>
        <kwd>MOOCs</kwd>
        <kwd>nursing education</kwd>
        <kwd>learning participation</kwd>
        <kwd>academic performance</kwd>
        <kwd>latent class analysis</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec sec-type="introduction">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have gained widespread attention in nursing education due to their openness and accessibility [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>]. MOOCs provide unprecedented opportunities for lifelong learning and professional development and, over recent years, have been widely introduced into nursing education, becoming a key approach for promoting reform in nursing teaching and enhancing the professional competence of nursing staff [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>]. However, while providing convenience, MOOCs also face a common challenge relating to a high enrollment rate but a low completion rate, with significant variations in the participation of learners and their learning performance [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>]. Studies have shown that the initial motivation of learners is a key factor influencing their online learning behaviors and final outcomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>]. On the basis of motivation, learners are categorized as “social learners” (voluntary) and “academic learners” (institution-mandated), with their performance often linked to credits or final grades and driven by significant external motivations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>].</p>
      <p>Previous studies indicate that academic learners often exhibit higher participation than social learners due to external motivation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>], which confirms the important role of external motivation in maintaining online learning behaviors. However, these studies have overlooked the heterogeneity and complexity within groups of different learners. For example, social or mixed MOOC learners were classified as committed, early dropout, and other learners [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>]; Wang et al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>] used latent class analysis (LCA) to categorize MOOC learners into committed, negative, midterm dropout, and early dropout learner types. Not all academic learners are actively engaged, nor are all social learners passively inactive: both groups include learners with high participation, minimal effort, and midterm withdrawal. This heterogeneity within each group suggests that a simple division of social and academic learners cannot fully explain the performance differences in MOOCs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>].</p>
      <p>Therefore, simply applying “social” or “academic” distinctions to explain differences in learning performance may obscure the real factors associated with this phenomenon. We need to consider whether the improved overall performance of academic learners due to the “academic” identity can improve their efficiency of learning or whether the proportion of “high-participation learners” within the academic learner group is much higher than that in the social learner group. If learners can be objectively classified based on their actual online learning behavioral characteristics, and then the distribution differences of learners with different backgrounds in these behavioral categories can be compared, it may be possible to more accurately identify the key factors associated with learning performance.</p>
      <p>Consequently, in this study, we retrospectively analyzed data from a rehabilitation nursing MOOC and applied LCA to identify different participation types based on the participation behaviors of learners in topic tests. We analyzed and compared differences in the proportion of these participation types between social and academic learners and investigated how these differences in distribution might be associated with final learning performance. In this study, we aimed to comprehensively analyze the heterogeneity within learner groups to provide empirical evidence for nursing educators to design more targeted MOOC teaching strategies and implement refined teaching management, thereby effectively improving the quality and efficacy of online nursing education.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec sec-type="methods">
      <title>Methods</title>
      <p>We conducted a retrospective study using data from a rehabilitation nursing MOOC.</p>
      <sec>
        <title>Participants</title>
        <p>This MOOC featured a dual structure. First, the course was freely open to the public without prerequisites. Second, participants who registered and engaged voluntarily were defined as social learners. Learners assigned by university teachers, who received blended online and offline instruction, were defined as academic learners with relatively smaller class sizes.</p>
        <p>Our dataset included all social and academic learners registered across 3 semesters (2021-2022) who had complete data on course type and examination and grade management modules. After excluding learners with missing information, the final sample comprised 8222 participants (<xref rid="figure1" ref-type="fig">Figure 1</xref>). This sample size far exceeds the minimum requirement of 300 for valid category analysis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>], ensuring sufficient statistical power. Notably, the online learning platform did not collect demographic characteristics (such as age, gender, and prior educational background) during learner registration, precluding control for these potential confounding variables.</p>
        <fig id="figure1" position="float">
          <label>Figure 1</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Flowchart of study participant screening. MOOC: massive open online courses.</p>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="mededu_v12i1e90827_fig1.png" alt-version="no" mimetype="image" position="float" xlink:type="simple"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>The Rehabilitation Nursing MOOC</title>
        <p>The rehabilitation nursing MOOC was hosted on the Wisdom Tree online education platform [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>]. The primary objective of this course was to enhance the comprehension of rehabilitation nursing theory through perceptual learning. The course welcomed all who registered via the Wisdom Tree platform without imposing any prerequisites. The course featured patient evaluation, rehabilitation nursing evaluation, rehabilitation treatment technology, rehabilitation nursing technology, and rehabilitation nursing for common diseases. Academic learners were provided with offline direct feedback, offline practicum activities, and online assessments. Offline direct feedback included face-to-face consultation between teachers and students and detailed feedback on assignments, provided every 2 weeks. Offline practical activities, arranged every 4 weeks in line with the teaching schedule, involved practical training related to the specialty. A diverse range of online assessments was used to evaluate the knowledge mastery of each learner. Diverse instructional resources, such as teaching videos, topic-specific assessments, and downloadable teaching materials, were used to deliver the content of each topic. Topic assessments comprised 5 to 17 questions that aimed to evaluate the understanding of each learner in that specific area.</p>
        <p>Limitations in platform data collection restricted our analysis to topic test participation as the sole measure of learning participation; broader engagement metrics (eg, logins, video viewing duration, time-on-task, forum activity, and teaching material downloads) were not available for extraction and analysis.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Outcome Indicators</title>
        <p>Learners who completed and submitted topic tests (including partial attempts and 0 scores) were treated as participants for each topic. The participation rate in each topic test was computed by dividing the number who submitted a test (achieved a score, including 0) by the total number enrolled. The learner types were then categorized via LCA based on data from 6 administered topic tests.</p>
        <p>Learning performance was the secondary outcome indicator, quantified by individual topic test scores. Because the 6 tests had different numbers of questions, raw scores were standardized to a 0 to 100 scale by dividing the actual score by the maximum possible score and multiplying by 100.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Data Analysis</title>
        <p>All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software (version 25.0; IBM Corp) and Mplus software (version 8.3; Muthén &#38; Muthén). Descriptive statistics were computed to describe the number of social and academic learners considering each topic test, including participation rates, frequencies, and percentages.</p>
        <p>LCA quantifies the heterogeneity of a given population by classifying individuals based on their different response patterns across a series of observed indicators. For LCA in this study, we used binary indicator coding (1=submitted the topic test and 0=did not submit the topic test). Model estimation was conducted via maximum likelihood with full information maximum likelihood to handle missing data, adhering to the local independence assumption of LCA. We applied LCA to categorize learners based on their participation in each topic test. The distribution of social learners and academic learners across different learning participation types was computed, and results were expressed as frequencies and percentages. Differences were then tested for significance using the chi-square test. Descriptive statistics were also computed for the scores acquired by social and academic learners in each topic test. Scores are represented as means and SDs. The significance of the disparities in performance between social learners and academic learners was evaluated using 2-tailed <italic>t</italic> tests (for normally distributed data) or Mann-Whitney <italic>U</italic> tests (for data that were not normally distributed). Because of the limited reliability and stability of statistical analyses, comparisons between subgroups with small sample sizes (n&#60;5) and the other 2 groups were considered exploratory.</p>
        <p>To ascertain the optimum number of latent classes, a single-class model was first prepared as a baseline for comparison. Subsequently, the number of latent classes was incrementally increased, and the fit indices of the resulting models were compared. The best model, with the optimum number of classes, was determined based on both statistical and practical significance [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>]. We considered several indices of model fit, including the Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion, and the adjusted Bayesian information criterion. For each of these indices, a smaller value indicates a better model fit. Lo-Mendell-Rubin and bootstrap likelihood ratio tests were also performed. A significant <italic>P</italic> value indicated that the k-class model outperformed the (k−1)-class model [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>]. Entropy was used as an index of classification accuracy for a given model and ranged from 0 to 1. A value of ≥0.80 was considered to signify high classification accuracy.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Ethical Considerations</title>
        <p>This retrospective study was conducted using fully anonymized learner data obtained from an online course platform. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Sun Yat-sen University. Because of the use of deidentified retrospective data involving no more than minimal risk to participants, the study was granted exemption from full ethical review, and no specific approval number was assigned. Informed consent was waived in accordance with institutional guidelines for low-risk secondary research using anonymized data. No participants were recruited, and no compensation or incentives were provided for participation, as only anonymized, nonidentifiable secondary data were analyzed. The study adhered to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and protected the privacy of research participants. Data were obtained with official authorization from the Wisdom Tree platform, and all learner data were anonymized and renumbered before analysis.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec sec-type="results">
      <title>Results</title>
      <sec>
        <title>Participation Rates</title>
        <p>Academic learners maintained high participation rates across all topic tests (89.9%-91.2%), while social learners showed consistently low participation (6.7%-12.6%) and a progressive decline in engagement (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p>
        <table-wrap position="float" id="table1">
          <label>Table 1</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Participation rates in the different topic tests.</p>
          </caption>
          <table width="1000" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" border="1" rules="groups" frame="hsides">
            <col width="130"/>
            <col width="460"/>
            <col width="410"/>
            <thead>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Topic test</td>
                <td>Social learners (n=539), n (%)</td>
                <td>Academic learners (n=7683), n (%)</td>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 1</td>
                <td>68 (12.6)</td>
                <td>7005 (91.2)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 2</td>
                <td>53 (9.8)</td>
                <td>6989 (91)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 3</td>
                <td>47 (8.7)</td>
                <td>6951 (90.5)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 4</td>
                <td>38 (7.1)</td>
                <td>6937 (90.3)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 5</td>
                <td>42 (7.8)</td>
                <td>6954 (90.5)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>Test 6</td>
                <td>36 (6.7)</td>
                <td>6910 (89.9)</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Classification</title>
        <p>LCA identified 3 distinct participation patterns based on 6 topic tests, and the 3-class model was selected as the optimal solution (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). Although Lo-Mendell-Rubin and bootstrap likelihood ratio tests supported a 4-class model, the latter generated an overly specific category with only 0.1% (9/8222) of learners that had no practical interpretive value. In large samples, these tests can detect substantively trivial divisions, leading to overextraction [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>]. The emergent fourth class contributed negligible improvement in model fit (ΔAkaike information criterion &#60;25) and, given its small size, precluded meaningful between-group comparisons, while the 3-class model had high entropy (&#62;0.8) and meaningful, interpretable participation patterns. Therefore, consistent with recommended practices [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>], the 3-class solution was prioritized on grounds of parsimony, interpretability, and statistical stability. The final classification included 3 types: participation-declining (93/8222, 1.1%), high-participation (6959/8222, 84.6%), and lowest-participation (1170/8222, 14.2%).</p>
        <table-wrap position="float" id="table2">
          <label>Table 2</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Comparison of latent class model fit indices (N=8222).</p>
          </caption>
          <table width="1000" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" border="1" rules="groups" frame="hsides">
            <col width="90"/>
            <col width="120"/>
            <col width="120"/>
            <col width="110"/>
            <col width="130"/>
            <col width="140"/>
            <col width="90"/>
            <col width="200"/>
            <thead>
              <tr valign="bottom">
                <td>Model</td>
                <td>AIC<sup>a</sup></td>
                <td>BIC<sup>b</sup></td>
                <td>aBIC<sup>c</sup></td>
                <td>LMR<sup>d</sup>, <italic>P</italic> value</td>
                <td>BLRT<sup>e</sup>, <italic>P</italic> value</td>
                <td>Entropy</td>
                <td>Latent class distribution, n</td>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>1-class</td>
                <td>41,367.193</td>
                <td>41,409.280</td>
                <td>41,390.213</td>
                <td>—<sup>f</sup></td>
                <td>—</td>
                <td>1.000</td>
                <td>8222</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>2-class</td>
                <td>9925.287</td>
                <td>10,016.477</td>
                <td>9975.165</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
                <td>1.000</td>
                <td>6974/1248<sup>g</sup></td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>3-class</td>
                <td>9252.108</td>
                <td>9392.399</td>
                <td>9328.843</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
                <td>0.998</td>
                <td>93/6959/1170<sup>g</sup></td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>4-class</td>
                <td>9227.600</td>
                <td>9416.993</td>
                <td>9331.192</td>
                <td>&#60;.01</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
                <td>0.997</td>
                <td>9/6958/1172/83<sup>g</sup></td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
          <table-wrap-foot>
            <fn id="table2fn1">
              <p><sup>a</sup>AIC: Akaike information criterion.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn2">
              <p><sup>b</sup>BIC: Bayesian information criterion.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn3">
              <p><sup>c</sup>aBIC: adjusted Bayesian information criterion.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn4">
              <p><sup>d</sup>LMR: Lo-Mendell-Rubin.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn5">
              <p><sup>e</sup>BLRT: bootstrap likelihood ratio test.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn6">
              <p><sup>f</sup>Not applicable.</p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="table2fn7">
              <p><sup>g</sup>These separated numbers represent the sample sizes of the latent classes respectively. The slash symbols are only used to separate different group values and do not indicate fractions.</p>
            </fn>
          </table-wrap-foot>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>The participation probabilities trajectory of the 3 learner categories is shown in <xref rid="figure2" ref-type="fig">Figure 2</xref>. Participation-declining learners (class 1; 93/8222, 1.1%) exhibited gradually decreasing participation, with a notable decline after topic test 3. In contrast, high-participation learners (class 2; 6959/8222, 84.6%) maintained near-perfect participation rates across all tests, while lowest-participation learners (class 3; 1170/8222, 14.2%) showed minimal engagement throughout.</p>
        <fig id="figure2" position="float">
          <label>Figure 2</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Participation probability of different types of total learners across 6 topic tests.</p>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="mededu_v12i1e90827_fig2.png" alt-version="no" mimetype="image" position="float" xlink:type="simple"/>
        </fig>
        <p>The distribution of learner types differed significantly between groups (<italic>χ</italic><sup>2</sup>=2745.1; <italic>P</italic>&#60;.001; <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). Most social learners belonged to the lowest-participation group (482/539, 89.4%), with few belonging to the high-participation (36/539, 6.7%) or participation-declining (21/539, 3.9%) groups. In contrast, most academic learners belonged to the high-participation group (6923/7683, 90.1%), with smaller proportions belonging to the lowest-participation (688/7683, 9%) and participation-declining (72/7683, 0.9%) groups.</p>
        <table-wrap position="float" id="table3">
          <label>Table 3</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Distribution of learner types by group.</p>
          </caption>
          <table width="1000" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" border="1">
            <col width="30"/>
            <col width="280"/>
            <col width="220"/>
            <col width="260"/>
            <col width="130"/>
            <col width="80"/>
            <thead>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="2">Group</td>
                <td>Social learners (n=539), n (%)</td>
                <td>Academic learners(n=7683), n (%)</td>
                <td>Chi-square(<italic>df</italic>)</td>
                <td><italic>P</italic> value</td>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="4">
                  <bold>Learner type</bold>
                </td>
                <td>2745.1 (2)</td>
                <td>&#60;.001</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td/>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td>21 (3.9)</td>
                <td>72 (0.9)</td>
                <td/>
                <td/>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td/>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td>36 (6.7)</td>
                <td>6923 (90.1)</td>
                <td/>
                <td/>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td/>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td>482 (89.4)</td>
                <td>688 (9)</td>
                <td/>
                <td/>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Learning Performance</title>
        <p>Academic learners significantly outperformed social learners among high-participation learners (all <italic>P</italic>&#60;.05; <italic>r</italic>=0.06-0.10), with no significant performance differences detected between the 2 groups in the other 2 participation types (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>). Comparisons of subgroups with small sample sizes (n&#60;5) were considered exploratory only, with no statistical inference value because of limited reliability and stability.</p>
        <table-wrap position="float" id="table4">
          <label>Table 4</label>
          <caption>
            <p>Comparison of test scores between social and academic learners by learner type.</p>
          </caption>
          <table width="1000" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" border="1" rules="groups" frame="hsides">
            <col width="30"/>
            <col width="170"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="100"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="100"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="70"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="100"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="100"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="90"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="60"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="70"/>
            <col width="0"/>
            <col width="110"/>
            <thead>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="3">Topic test and learner type</td>
                <td colspan="7">Social learners (n=539)</td>
                <td colspan="7">Academic learners (n=7683)</td>
                <td colspan="5">Mann-Whitney <italic>U</italic> test</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="3">
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td colspan="2">Mean (SD)</td>
                <td colspan="2">95% CI</td>
                <td colspan="2">n (%)</td>
                <td colspan="3">Mean (SD)</td>
                <td colspan="2">95% CI</td>
                <td colspan="2">n (%)</td>
                <td colspan="3">
                  <italic>Z</italic>
                </td>
                <td colspan="2"><italic>P</italic> value</td>
                <td>Effect size (<italic>r</italic>)</td>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 1</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">89.00 (3.40)</td>
                <td colspan="2">87.21-90.79</td>
                <td colspan="2">20 (3.7)</td>
                <td colspan="3">78.84 (2.97)</td>
                <td colspan="2">78.03-79.65</td>
                <td colspan="2">69 (0.9)</td>
                <td colspan="3">−1.541</td>
                <td colspan="2">.12</td>
                <td colspan="2">−0.16</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">74.29 (6.74)</td>
                <td colspan="2">71.98-76.60</td>
                <td colspan="2">35 (6.5)</td>
                <td colspan="3">95.56 (0.16)</td>
                <td colspan="2">95.52-95.60</td>
                <td colspan="2">6922 (90.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">5.125</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.06</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">86.15 (4.17)</td>
                <td colspan="2">80.23-92.07</td>
                <td colspan="2">13 (2.4)</td>
                <td colspan="3">78.57 (6.45)</td>
                <td colspan="2">69.81-87.33</td>
                <td colspan="2">14 (0.2)</td>
                <td colspan="3">−0.700</td>
                <td colspan="2">.48</td>
                <td colspan="2">−0.14</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 2</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">70.00 (7.09)</td>
                <td colspan="2">66.41-73.59</td>
                <td colspan="2">18 (3.3)</td>
                <td colspan="3">75.71 (3.04)</td>
                <td colspan="2">74.94-76.48</td>
                <td colspan="2">70 (0.9)</td>
                <td colspan="3">0.721</td>
                <td colspan="2">.47</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.08</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">69.71 (6.58)</td>
                <td colspan="2">67.49-71.93</td>
                <td colspan="2">35 (6.5)</td>
                <td colspan="3">94.63 (0.19)</td>
                <td colspan="2">94.59-94.67</td>
                <td colspan="2">6919 (90.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">6.839</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.08</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">—<sup>a</sup></td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 3</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">82.42 (3.95)</td>
                <td colspan="2">79.81-85.03</td>
                <td colspan="2">11 (2)</td>
                <td colspan="3">66.00 (5.37)</td>
                <td colspan="2">64.12-67.88</td>
                <td colspan="2">30 (0.4)</td>
                <td colspan="3">−1.349</td>
                <td colspan="2">.18</td>
                <td colspan="2">−0.21</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">71.30 (6.36)</td>
                <td colspan="2">69.18-73.42</td>
                <td colspan="2">36 (6.7)</td>
                <td colspan="3">94.40 (0.18)</td>
                <td colspan="2">94.36-94.44</td>
                <td colspan="2">6920 (90.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">6.360</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.08</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">1 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 4</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">41.67 (41.67)</td>
                <td colspan="2">8.01-75.33</td>
                <td colspan="2">2 (0.4)</td>
                <td colspan="3">75.00 (7.41)</td>
                <td colspan="2">70.98-79.02</td>
                <td colspan="2">14 (0.2)</td>
                <td colspan="3">1.148</td>
                <td colspan="2">.25</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.29</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">74.07 (6.63)</td>
                <td colspan="2">71.95-76.19</td>
                <td colspan="2">36 (6.7)</td>
                <td colspan="3">95.38 (0.18)</td>
                <td colspan="2">95.34-95.42</td>
                <td colspan="2">6923 (90.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">5.192</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.06</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 5</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">66.67 (6.67)</td>
                <td colspan="2">50.11-83.23</td>
                <td colspan="2">3 (0.6)</td>
                <td colspan="3">52.00 (14.97)</td>
                <td colspan="2">38.04-65.96</td>
                <td colspan="2">5 (0.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">−0.800</td>
                <td colspan="2">.42</td>
                <td colspan="2">−0.28</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">58.33 (6.34)</td>
                <td colspan="2">56.29-60.37</td>
                <td colspan="2">36 (6.7)</td>
                <td colspan="3">92.27 (0.22)</td>
                <td colspan="2">92.23-92.31</td>
                <td colspan="2">6922 (90.1)</td>
                <td colspan="3">8.561</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.10</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">53.33 (6.67)</td>
                <td colspan="2">40.11-66.55</td>
                <td colspan="2">3 (0.6)</td>
                <td colspan="3">50.37 (5.05)</td>
                <td colspan="2">48.19-52.55</td>
                <td colspan="2">27 (0.4)</td>
                <td colspan="3">0.000</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#62;.99</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.00</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td colspan="22">
                  <bold>Test 6</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Participation-declining</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">0</td>
                <td colspan="2">0 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">47.06 (8.99)</td>
                <td colspan="2">31.08-63.04</td>
                <td colspan="2">3 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
                <td colspan="2">—</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>High-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">57.35 (7.52)</td>
                <td colspan="2">54.51-60.19</td>
                <td colspan="2">32 (5.9)</td>
                <td colspan="3">94.57 (0.18)</td>
                <td colspan="2">94.53-94.61</td>
                <td colspan="2">6904 (89.9)</td>
                <td colspan="3">7.412</td>
                <td colspan="2">&#60;.001</td>
                <td colspan="2">0.09</td>
              </tr>
              <tr valign="top">
                <td>
                  <break/>
                </td>
                <td>Lowest-participation</td>
                <td colspan="2">51.47 (17.04)</td>
                <td colspan="2">26.11-76.83</td>
                <td colspan="2">4 (0.7)</td>
                <td colspan="3">33.33 (13.73)</td>
                <td colspan="2">12.11-54.55</td>
                <td colspan="2">3 (0)</td>
                <td colspan="3">−0.535</td>
                <td colspan="2">.59</td>
                <td colspan="2">−0.20</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
          <table-wrap-foot>
            <fn id="table4fn1">
              <p><sup>a</sup>Insufficient data for analysis (n&#60;5).</p>
            </fn>
          </table-wrap-foot>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec sec-type="discussion">
      <title>Discussion</title>
      <sec>
        <title>Principal Findings</title>
        <p>As an observational study, this research explored factors associated with performance disparities between social and academic learners in a rehabilitation nursing MOOC from the perspective of participation type distribution; causal relationships between the investigated variables cannot be established, and only associative correlations were identified. There were three key findings: (1) divergent participation type distributions between social and academic learners; (2) superior performance of academic learners in the high-participation subgroup; and (3) no significant performance differences in non–high-participation subgroups.</p>
        <p>Most notably, the 2 groups showed starkly divergent participation type distributions—the core factor associated with their overall performance gap: more than 90% of academic learners belonged to the high-participation group, whereas nearly 90% of social learners belonged to the lowest-participation group. This underscores the pivotal impact of learner background and learning environment on participation patterns [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>]. As nursing undergraduates, academic learners sustained high participation through teacher supervision, peer learning, and credit pressure—a robust external support system for continuous engagement, consistent with Uijl et al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>], who found interpersonal connections and structured learning arrangements to enhance learner interaction and participation. In contrast, social learners lacked such external constraints and institutional support despite greater autonomy, leaving them prone to low participation or midcourse dropout [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>]. These patterns align with prior LCA of nursing MOOCs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>]. Wang et al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>] also identified committed learners as the highest-performing group, with no significant performance differences across noncommitted types. While Wang et al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>] distinguished 4 classes among course completers, this analysis of all registrants yielded 3, a discrepancy likely attributable to sample composition differences [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>]. This work extends prior research by demonstrating that academic learners’ performance advantage stems from their overrepresentation in the committed learner group.</p>
        <p>In addition, academic learners’ high-participation subgroup outperformed social counterparts across all 6 topic tests (all <italic>P</italic>&#60;.001) with trivial to small effect sizes (<italic>r</italic>=0.06-0.10) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>]. This large-sample research characteristic arose because the sizable academic high-participation cohort (n≥6900) heightened the Mann-Whitney <italic>U</italic> test sensitivity, detecting minor mean differences as significant [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>]. In contrast, participation-declining and lowest-participation subgroups (mostly n&#60;50) showed no statistical score differences and similarly trivial to small effect sizes, with their disparities bearing neither statistical nor practical meaning. This confirms the high-participation group as the core carrier of performance differences between cohorts, validating our design centered on participation type distribution.</p>
        <p>The far higher proportion of high-participation learners among academic groups, and their stable, sustained engagement, drives the superior overall performance of academic learners: such learners exhibit strong engagement and self-regulation, enabling systematic task completion, active course participation, and in-depth knowledge acquisition and transfer. Conversely, the low proportion of high-participation learners among social learners underpins their poorer performance. While prior research identified high-participation learners as the highest-performing subgroup [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>], our findings further reveal that background-based disparities in their proportion decisively shape learning outcomes, highlighting participation composition as central to explaining performance differences. Consistent statistical significance in the high-participation group’s gap confirms academic learners’ stable advantage, a strength derived from institutional external support rather than inherent learning ability gaps [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>].</p>
        <p>Our analysis also showed that both academic and social learner groups featured a certain proportion of participation-declining and lowest-participation learners, although there were no significant differences between these learners in academic performance. This finding is consistent with the early classifications of MOOC learner types. For example, Reich [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>] and Gilligan et al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>] identified low-participation groups, including bystander learners and early dropout learners. Subsequent studies have confirmed that these groups are widespread and achieve poor learning outcomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>-<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>]. This may be due to the general lack of internal learning motivation and continuous engagement among such learners. This aligns with self-determination theory, which posits that when internal motivation is insufficient, the effect of external incentives is also greatly reduced, making it difficult to drive effective learning behaviors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>]. These data also indicate that once learners lack continuous engagement, it is difficult for their academic performance to reach the desired level regardless of their background. Therefore, future development and application of MOOCs should involve incentive mechanisms, emotional support, and learning analytics to increase student participation and reduce the proportion of participation-declining and lowest-participation learners.</p>
        <p>The predominance of committed learners among academic students (6923/7683, 90.1% vs 36/539, 6.7% in social learners) suggests that participation type may serve as an intervening variable in the pathway between learner background and performance—a finding consistent with recent MOOC research demonstrating that engagement patterns link learner characteristics to outcomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>]. However, this observational finding is hypothesis-generating only. Academic learners’ superior performance may equally reflect offline institutional support absent for social learners, and unmeasured mediator-outcome confounding cannot be ruled out [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>]. Future causal mediation studies with comprehensive covariate measurement are needed to test whether participation patterns represent a genuine pathway.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Limitations</title>
        <p>This study has several limitations. First, the lack of demographic data (eg, age and prior educational background) from the online platform limited our ability to control for potential confounding variables in the analysis. Second, some subgroups had extremely small sample sizes (n&#60;5), which reduced the statistical power of relevant comparisons and limited their generalizability. These results should therefore be considered exploratory and require further validation in future studies with larger samples.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
        <title>Conclusions</title>
        <p>This study identified 3 distinct participation types (participation-declining, high-participation, and lowest-participation) among rehabilitation nursing MOOC learners. Academic learners predominantly belonged to the high-participation group, while social learners predominantly belonged to the lowest-participation group. The performance advantage of academic learners was primarily associated with the larger proportion of high-participation learners in their group, and academic learners significantly outperformed social learners within this subgroup. No significant performance differences were found between the 2 groups in the participation-declining and lowest-participation types, confirming that sustained participation is key to improving MOOC learning outcomes. These findings provide empirical evidence for nursing MOOC teaching design, suggesting that instructors should prioritize sustaining learner participation and implement tailored support strategies for voluntary social learners to enhance their engagement and persistence, thereby narrowing the performance gap between the 2 groups.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <app-group/>
    <glossary>
      <title>Abbreviations</title>
      <def-list>
        <def-item>
          <term id="abb1">LCA</term>
          <def>
            <p>latent class analysis</p>
          </def>
        </def-item>
        <def-item>
          <term id="abb2">MOOC</term>
          <def>
            <p>massive open online course</p>
          </def>
        </def-item>
      </def-list>
    </glossary>
    <ack>
      <p>The authors are grateful to the Wisdom Tree online education platform for providing anonymized course data and technical support for this retrospective study. The authors also thank the research assistants at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital for their assistance with preliminary data organization.</p>
    </ack>
    <notes>
      <title>Data Availability</title>
      <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available from the Wisdom Tree online education platform [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>], although restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for this study. Aggregated data (eg, participation rates by learner group, mean test scores by participation class, and latent class analysis model fit indices) are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with permission from the Wisdom Tree online education platform. Raw learner log data cannot be shared due to platform data privacy policies.</p>
    </notes>
    <notes>
      <title>Funding</title>
      <p>The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grants 71974213 and 81902290), the Undergraduate Teaching Quality and Teaching Reform Project of Guangdong Province (grant [2023] number 4), and the Undergraduate Teaching Quality and Teaching Reform Project of Sun Yat-sen University (2018, 2019, and 2021; grant 81000-12220011).</p>
    </notes>
    <fn-group>
      <fn fn-type="con">
        <p>Conceptualization: KL, TY, XZ</p>
        <p>Data curation: WW, LX, YW, XH, YQ, JX, LZ, TY, XZ</p>
        <p>Formal analysis: JZ</p>
        <p>Funding acquisition: KL, XZ</p>
        <p>Investigation: JZ</p>
        <p>Methodology: KL</p>
        <p>Project administration: KL, TY, XZ</p>
        <p>Resources: LX, YQ, JX, TY, XZ</p>
        <p>Software: JZ, WW</p>
        <p>Supervision: TY, XZ</p>
        <p>Validation: JZ</p>
        <p>Writing—original draft: JZ</p>
        <p>Writing—review and editing: KL, WW, YW, XH, LZ, LX, YQ, JX, XZ</p>
      </fn>
      <fn fn-type="conflict">
        <p>None declared.</p>
      </fn>
    </fn-group>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <label>1</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Mahajan</surname>
              <given-names>R</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Gupta</surname>
              <given-names>P</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Singh</surname>
              <given-names>T</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Massive open online courses: concept and implications</article-title>
          <source>Indian Pediatr</source>
          <year>2019</year>
          <month>06</month>
          <day>15</day>
          <volume>56</volume>
          <issue>6</issue>
          <fpage>489</fpage>
          <lpage>95</lpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://www.indianpediatrics.net/june2019/489.pdf"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">31278230</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <label>2</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Longhini</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>De Colle</surname>
              <given-names>B</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Rossettini</surname>
              <given-names>G</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Palese</surname>
              <given-names>A</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>What knowledge is available on massive open online courses in nursing and academic healthcare sciences education? A rapid review</article-title>
          <source>Nurse Educ Today</source>
          <year>2021</year>
          <month>04</month>
          <volume>99</volume>
          <fpage>104812</fpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/33610051"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.nedt.2021.104812</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">33610051</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">S0260-6917(21)00069-1</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC9756889</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <label>3</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Sermeus</surname>
              <given-names>W</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Aiken</surname>
              <given-names>LH</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Van den Heede</surname>
              <given-names>K</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Rafferty</surname>
              <given-names>AM</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Griffiths</surname>
              <given-names>P</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Moreno-Casbas</surname>
              <given-names>MT</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Busse</surname>
              <given-names>R</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Lindqvist</surname>
              <given-names>R</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Scott</surname>
              <given-names>AP</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Bruyneel</surname>
              <given-names>L</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Brzostek</surname>
              <given-names>T</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Kinnunen</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Schubert</surname>
              <given-names>M</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Schoonhoven</surname>
              <given-names>L</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zikos</surname>
              <given-names>D</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Nurse forecasting in Europe (RN4CAST): rationale, design and methodology</article-title>
          <source>BMC Nurs</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          <month>04</month>
          <day>18</day>
          <volume>10</volume>
          <fpage>6</fpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://bmcnurs.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6955-10-6"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1472-6955-10-6</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">21501487</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">1472-6955-10-6</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC3108324</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <label>4</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Jordan</surname>
              <given-names>K</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Massive open online course completion rates revisited: assessment, length and attrition</article-title>
          <source>Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn</source>
          <year>2015</year>
          <month>06</month>
          <volume>16</volume>
          <issue>3</issue>
          <fpage>341</fpage>
          <lpage>58</lpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/12/mooc-completion-and-retention-in-the-context-of-student-intent"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <label>5</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Ryan</surname>
              <given-names>RM</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Deci</surname>
              <given-names>EL</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being</article-title>
          <source>Am Psychol</source>
          <year>2000</year>
          <month>01</month>
          <volume>55</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>68</fpage>
          <lpage>78</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">11392867</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <label>6</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Badali</surname>
              <given-names>M</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Hatami</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Banihashem</surname>
              <given-names>SK</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Rahimi</surname>
              <given-names>E</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Noroozi</surname>
              <given-names>O</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Eslami</surname>
              <given-names>Z</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The role of motivation in MOOCs’ retention rates: a systematic literature review</article-title>
          <source>Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn</source>
          <year>2022</year>
          <month>02</month>
          <day>05</day>
          <volume>17</volume>
          <fpage>5</fpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s41039-022-00181-3</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <label>7</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Romero-Frías</surname>
              <given-names>E</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Arquero</surname>
              <given-names>JL</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>del Barrio-García</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Exploring how student motivation relates to acceptance and participation in MOOCs</article-title>
          <source>Interact Learn Environ</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          <month>07</month>
          <day>28</day>
          <volume>31</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>480</fpage>
          <lpage>96</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10494820.2020.1799020</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <label>8</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Jia</surname>
              <given-names>M</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Gong</surname>
              <given-names>D</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Luo</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zhao</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zheng</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Li</surname>
              <given-names>K</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Who can benefit more from massive open online courses? A prospective cohort study</article-title>
          <source>Nurse Educ Today</source>
          <year>2019</year>
          <month>05</month>
          <volume>76</volume>
          <fpage>96</fpage>
          <lpage>102</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.nedt.2019.02.004</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">30776535</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">S0260-6917(19)30105-4</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <label>9</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Wang</surname>
              <given-names>W</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zhao</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Cao</surname>
              <given-names>X</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Bai</surname>
              <given-names>Y</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Cheng</surname>
              <given-names>L</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Jin</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>You</surname>
              <given-names>L</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Li</surname>
              <given-names>K</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Analysis of participation and performance of MOOC learners via latent class analysis: a retrospective study based on the data of a nursing MOOC from 2018 to 2022</article-title>
          <source>Nurse Educ Today</source>
          <year>2023</year>
          <month>09</month>
          <volume>128</volume>
          <fpage>105888</fpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105888</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">37385148</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">S0260-6917(23)00182-X</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <label>10</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Nylund</surname>
              <given-names>KL</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Asparouhov</surname>
              <given-names>T</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Muthén</surname>
              <given-names>BO</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study</article-title>
          <source>Struct Equ Model</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          <month>12</month>
          <day>05</day>
          <volume>14</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>535</fpage>
          <lpage>69</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10705510701575396</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <label>11</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="web">
          <article-title>Rehabilitation nursing</article-title>
          <source>Wisdom Tree Network</source>
          <access-date>2026-03-26</access-date>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://coursehome.zhihuishu.com/courseHome/1000003742/127615/18#teachTeam">https://coursehome.zhihuishu.com/courseHome/1000003742/127615/18#teachTeam</ext-link>
          </comment>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <label>12</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Dziak</surname>
              <given-names>JJ</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Lanza</surname>
              <given-names>ST</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Tan</surname>
              <given-names>X</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Effect size, statistical power and sample size requirements for the bootstrap likelihood ratio test in latent class analysis</article-title>
          <source>Struct Equ Model</source>
          <year>2014</year>
          <month>01</month>
          <day>01</day>
          <volume>21</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>534</fpage>
          <lpage>52</lpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/25328371"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10705511.2014.919819</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">25328371</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC4196274</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <label>13</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Depaoli</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Qiu</surname>
              <given-names>M</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Liu</surname>
              <given-names>H</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Jauregui</surname>
              <given-names>M</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Class selection in growth mixture models: comparing information criteria to nonparametric and parametric Bayesian approaches</article-title>
          <source>Struct Equ Model</source>
          <year>2025</year>
          <month>10</month>
          <day>21</day>
          <volume>33</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>64</fpage>
          <lpage>80</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10705511.2025.2563187</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <label>14</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Tein</surname>
              <given-names>JY</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Coxe</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Cham</surname>
              <given-names>H</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Statistical power to detect the correct number of classes in latent profile analysis</article-title>
          <source>Struct Equ Model</source>
          <year>2013</year>
          <month>10</month>
          <day>01</day>
          <volume>20</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>640</fpage>
          <lpage>57</lpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/24489457"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10705511.2013.824781</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">24489457</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC3904803</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <label>15</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Shi</surname>
              <given-names>H</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zhou</surname>
              <given-names>Y</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Dennen</surname>
              <given-names>VP</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Hur</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Correction: From unsuccessful to successful learning: profiling behavior patterns and student clusters in massive open online courses</article-title>
          <source>Educ Inf Technol</source>
          <year>2023</year>
          <month>09</month>
          <day>01</day>
          <volume>29</volume>
          <fpage>9039</fpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10639-023-12191-9</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <label>16</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Uijl</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Filius</surname>
              <given-names>R</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Ten Cate</surname>
              <given-names>O</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Student interaction in small private online courses</article-title>
          <source>Med Sci Educ</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          <month>2</month>
          <day>14</day>
          <volume>27</volume>
          <fpage>237</fpage>
          <lpage>42</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s40670-017-0380-x</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <label>17</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Rawat</surname>
              <given-names>S</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Kumar</surname>
              <given-names>D</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Kumar</surname>
              <given-names>P</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Khattri</surname>
              <given-names>C</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>A systematic analysis using classification machine learning algorithms to understand why learners drop out of MOOCs</article-title>
          <source>Neural Comput Appl</source>
          <year>2021</year>
          <month>05</month>
          <day>31</day>
          <volume>33</volume>
          <fpage>14823</fpage>
          <lpage>35</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00521-021-06122-3</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <label>18</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Kang</surname>
              <given-names>IG</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Heterogeneity of learners’ behavioral patterns of watching videos and completing assessments in massive open online courses (MOOCs): a latent class analysis</article-title>
          <source>Int Rev Res Open Distribut Learn</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          <volume>21</volume>
          <issue>4</issue>
          <fpage>222</fpage>
          <lpage>37</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4645</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <label>19</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Fritz</surname>
              <given-names>CO</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Morris</surname>
              <given-names>PE</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Richler</surname>
              <given-names>JJ</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation</article-title>
          <source>J Exp Psychol Gen</source>
          <year>2012</year>
          <month>02</month>
          <volume>141</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>2</fpage>
          <lpage>18</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1037/a0024338</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">21823805</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">2011-16756-001</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <label>20</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Schmidt</surname>
              <given-names>FL</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: implications for training of researchers</article-title>
          <source>Psychol Methods</source>
          <year>1996</year>
          <volume>1</volume>
          <issue>2</issue>
          <fpage>115</fpage>
          <lpage>29</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.115</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <label>21</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Salas-Pilco</surname>
              <given-names>SZ</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Yang</surname>
              <given-names>Y</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Zhang</surname>
              <given-names>Z</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Student engagement in online learning in Latin American higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review</article-title>
          <source>Br J Educ Technol</source>
          <year>2022</year>
          <month>05</month>
          <volume>53</volume>
          <issue>3</issue>
          <fpage>593</fpage>
          <lpage>619</lpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/35600418"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/bjet.13190</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">35600418</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pii">BJET13190</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC9111674</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <label>22</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Reich</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>MOOC completion and retention in the context of student intent</article-title>
          <source>EDUCAUSE Rev</source>
          <year>2014</year>
          <month>12</month>
          <day>8</day>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/12/mooc-completion-and-retention-in-the-context-of-student-intent"/>
          </comment>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <label>23</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Gilligan</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Chen</surname>
              <given-names>W</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Darzentas</surname>
              <given-names>J</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Using MOOCs to promote digital accessibility and universal design, the MOOCAP experience</article-title>
          <source>Stud Health Technol Inform</source>
          <year>2018</year>
          <volume>256</volume>
          <fpage>78</fpage>
          <lpage>86</lpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">30371462</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <label>24</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="confproc">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Kizilcec</surname>
              <given-names>RF</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Piech</surname>
              <given-names>C</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Schneider</surname>
              <given-names>E</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses</article-title>
          <source>Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge</source>
          <year>2013</year>
          <conf-name>LAK '13</conf-name>
          <conf-date>April 8-13, 2013</conf-date>
          <conf-loc>Leuven, Belgium</conf-loc>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1145/2460296.2460330</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <label>25</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Wei</surname>
              <given-names>X</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Saab</surname>
              <given-names>N</given-names>
            </name>
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Admiraal</surname>
              <given-names>W</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>What rationale would work? Unfolding the role of learners’ attitudes and motivation in predicting learning engagement and perceived learning outcomes in MOOCs</article-title>
          <source>Int J Educ Technol High Educ</source>
          <year>2024</year>
          <month>01</month>
          <day>22</day>
          <volume>21</volume>
          <fpage>5</fpage>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s41239-023-00433-2</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <label>26</label>
        <nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name name-style="western">
              <surname>Loh</surname>
              <given-names>WW</given-names>
            </name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Unmeasured mediator-outcome confounding distorts both indirect and direct effects</article-title>
          <source>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A</source>
          <year>2024</year>
          <month>11</month>
          <day>19</day>
          <volume>121</volume>
          <issue>47</issue>
          <fpage>e2418979121</fpage>
          <comment>
            <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2418979121?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&#38;rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&#38;rfr_dat=cr_pub  0pubmed"/>
          </comment>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.2418979121</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="medline">39508758</pub-id>
          <pub-id pub-id-type="pmcid">PMC11588076</pub-id>
        </nlm-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>
