Advancing Evidence-Based Health Innovation in Brazil: A Qualitative Program Evaluation of a Binational Educational Initiative to Build Interprofessional Capacity

Background: Health innovation education often lacks focus on local realities and practitioner-led approaches. An international Canada-Brazil academic partnership was developed to address this gap within Brazil’s Unified Health System. Objectives: This paper examines attendees’ perceptions of a short-term, binational educational intervention and identifies perceived gaps in innovation training within a resource-constrained health system. Design: A qualitative, pedagogically focused program evaluation of a short-term binational educational intervention, using participant reflections and post-course survey responses to examine perceived learning, applicability, and curricular gaps. Settings: Two academic and clinical sites in Vitória and Salvador, Brazil. Attendees: Fifty attendees (30 in Vitória, 20 in Salvador), comprising students, faculty, and health and social care professionals. Methods: The 30 h in-person course was delivered in late November (Vitória) and early December 2025 (Salvador) and addressed ‘wicked problems’ through value proposition development, design thinking, and prototyping. Facilitated by a Canadian faculty with English–Portuguese simultaneous translation. The course’s immediate evaluation used daily reflective exercises and a final participant survey. Results: Respondents’ reflections suggested a perceived reframing of innovation from a primarily technology-oriented concept toward a human-centered, context-responsive, and systems-oriented process. Respondents also identified areas requiring further curricular attention, including financial sustainability, implementation planning, and impact evaluation. Conclusions: Findings from this immediate post-course evaluation suggest that short-term, interprofessional innovation education may support perceived shifts in how participants understand health innovation. However, because the evaluation relied on self-reported, post-course qualitative data without pre/post or longitudinal measures, findings should be interpreted as perceived learning and exploratory curricular insight rather than demonstrated competency development or sustained implementation capacity.