Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the relationships between the characteristics of nurses’ work schedules, health outcomes, and work–life balance. Methods: This was a secondary data analysis that included 422 nurses in Korean hospitals. Descriptive analysis, independent sample t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson correlation analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis were used to identify the associated factors. Results: Multiple linear regression analysis showed that work–life balance was lower when atypical work was performed (β = -.14, p = .010). Nurses who did not work overtime showed a higher level of work–life balance than those who worked overtime infrequently (β = -.11, p = .002) or frequently (β = -.28, p < .001). The work–life balance level increased when nurses had better subjective health status (β = .16, p < .001) or higher sleep quality (β = .29, p < .001). It was verified that the work–life balance level was higher for single-person households than for households with two (β = -.18, p = .003), three to four (β = -.16, p = .022), or five or more (β = -.21, p < .001) persons. Conclusion This study suggests that government and hospital organizations should provide high-quality care and consideration to nurses who do atypical or overtime work as well as their subjective health status and sleep quality. Further research should focus on the development of a policy that improves the work–life balance of nurses, especially for those who work during atypical hours.

The peer review process ensures the integrity of scientific research. This is particularly important in the medical field, where research findings directly impact patient care. However, the rapid growth of publications has strained reviewers, causing delays and potential declines in quality. Generative artificial intelligence, especially large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, may assist researchers with efficient, high-quality reviews. This review explores the integration of LLMs into peer review, highlighting their strengths in linguistic tasks and challenges in assessing scientific validity, particularly in clinical medicine. Key points for integration include initial screening, reviewer matching, feedback support, and language review. However, implementing LLMs for these purposes will necessitate addressing biases, privacy concerns, and data confidentiality. We recommend using LLMs as complementary tools under clear guidelines to support, not replace, human expertise in maintaining rigorous peer review standards.

The peer review process ensures the integrity of scientific research. This is particularly important in the medical field, where research findings directly impact patient care. However, the rapid growth of publications has strained reviewers, causing delays and potential declines in quality. Generative artificial intelligence, especially large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, may assist researchers with efficient, high-quality reviews. This review explores the integration of LLMs into peer review, highlighting their strengths in linguistic tasks and challenges in assessing scientific validity, particularly in clinical medicine. Key points for integration include initial screening, reviewer matching, feedback support, and language review. However, implementing LLMs for these purposes will necessitate addressing biases, privacy concerns, and data confidentiality. We recommend using LLMs as complementary tools under clear guidelines to support, not replace, human expertise in maintaining rigorous peer review standards.

The peer review process ensures the integrity of scientific research. This is particularly important in the medical field, where research findings directly impact patient care. However, the rapid growth of publications has strained reviewers, causing delays and potential declines in quality. Generative artificial intelligence, especially large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, may assist researchers with efficient, high-quality reviews. This review explores the integration of LLMs into peer review, highlighting their strengths in linguistic tasks and challenges in assessing scientific validity, particularly in clinical medicine. Key points for integration include initial screening, reviewer matching, feedback support, and language review. However, implementing LLMs for these purposes will necessitate addressing biases, privacy concerns, and data confidentiality. We recommend using LLMs as complementary tools under clear guidelines to support, not replace, human expertise in maintaining rigorous peer review standards.

Purpose: This study compared COVID-19 vaccination intentions in those with and without chronic diseases (CDs and non-CDs) in South Korea. We hypothesized that the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions would differ between CDs and non-CDs in South Korea. Methods: Using survey data collected through a Korean online panel in June 2021, we conducted a crosssectional secondary data analysis. Of the 2292 participants, 411 had at least one chronic disease. To construct a comparable dataset, we selected non-CDs via a 1:1 case-control matching for age and gender.We then utilized a multivariable binary logistic regression model to explore the factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccination intentions in CDs and non-CDs. Results: All told, over 75% of participants in both groups indicated that they intended to vaccinate against COVID-19. In both groups, those who mistrusted general vaccine benefits reported significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Regarding factors associated with vaccination intentions, CDs identified anxiety regarding coronavirus and exposure to COVID-19 vaccination promotions at the community level, while non-CDs highlighted hesitancy regarding vaccines and confidence in government/health services. Conclusion Improving vaccination acceptance will require the development and implementation of tailored approaches for CDs and non-CDs and efforts to minimize general vaccine mistrust.

Purpose: This study compared COVID-19 vaccination intentions in those with and without chronic diseases (CDs and non-CDs) in South Korea. We hypothesized that the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions would differ between CDs and non-CDs in South Korea. Methods: Using survey data collected through a Korean online panel in June 2021, we conducted a crosssectional secondary data analysis. Of the 2292 participants, 411 had at least one chronic disease. To construct a comparable dataset, we selected non-CDs via a 1:1 case-control matching for age and gender.We then utilized a multivariable binary logistic regression model to explore the factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccination intentions in CDs and non-CDs. Results: All told, over 75% of participants in both groups indicated that they intended to vaccinate against COVID-19. In both groups, those who mistrusted general vaccine benefits reported significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Regarding factors associated with vaccination intentions, CDs identified anxiety regarding coronavirus and exposure to COVID-19 vaccination promotions at the community level, while non-CDs highlighted hesitancy regarding vaccines and confidence in government/health services. Conclusion Improving vaccination acceptance will require the development and implementation of tailored approaches for CDs and non-CDs and efforts to minimize general vaccine mistrust.

Purpose: This study compared COVID-19 vaccination intentions in those with and without chronic diseases (CDs and non-CDs) in South Korea. We hypothesized that the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions would differ between CDs and non-CDs in South Korea. Methods: Using survey data collected through a Korean online panel in June 2021, we conducted a crosssectional secondary data analysis. Of the 2292 participants, 411 had at least one chronic disease. To construct a comparable dataset, we selected non-CDs via a 1:1 case-control matching for age and gender.We then utilized a multivariable binary logistic regression model to explore the factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccination intentions in CDs and non-CDs. Results: All told, over 75% of participants in both groups indicated that they intended to vaccinate against COVID-19. In both groups, those who mistrusted general vaccine benefits reported significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Regarding factors associated with vaccination intentions, CDs identified anxiety regarding coronavirus and exposure to COVID-19 vaccination promotions at the community level, while non-CDs highlighted hesitancy regarding vaccines and confidence in government/health services. Conclusion Improving vaccination acceptance will require the development and implementation of tailored approaches for CDs and non-CDs and efforts to minimize general vaccine mistrust.

Suicide has been a public health issue in many countries, and Korea has ranked highest suicide rate among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries over a decade. To address these issues, we updated the recent trends in suicidal ideation and suicide attempts among Korean adults followed by previous data observation. We used data from five sources: Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination (KNHANES, '07–12, '13, '15–16), Korean Community Health Survey (KCHS, '08–09, '13), Korean Wealth Panel Study (KOWEPS, '12–16), Korea Health Panel Survey (KHP, '10–13), and cause of death data from Statistics Korea ('07–16). We used weighted frequencies and trend tests. The rate of suicidal ideation as recent year was 5.10% (KNHANES, '15), 8.95% (KCHS, '13), 2.08% (KOWEPS, '16), and 5.39% (KHP, '13). That of suicide attempts as recent year was 0.59% (KNHANES, '16), 0.41% (KCHS, '13), and 0.08% (KOWEPS, '16). Annual percentage change of suicidal ideation was −2.80% (KNHANES, '07–12), 5.78% (KNHANES, '13–15), 0.62% (KCHS, '08–13), −8.50% (KOWEPS, '12–16), and −10.94% (KHP, '10–13). Annual percentage change of suicide attempts was −3.84% (KNHANES, '07–12), 2.26% (KNHANES, '13–16), −2.53% (KCHS, '08–13), and −20.22% (KOWEPS, '12–16). Annual percentage change of death by intentional self-harm was −0.49% (Statistics Korea, '07–16). Individuals who had lower income level were more likely to experience suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. According to these results, the rate of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts showed the decreasing tendency. However, the suicide rate of Korea has remained higher than that of OECD countries. Thus, continuous data observation and effective policies on suicide are needed.
Adult ; Cause of Death ; Health Surveys ; Humans ; Korea ; Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development ; Public Health ; Suicidal Ideation ; Suicide

OBJECTIVES: Patients with kidney disease have been prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination due to their susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. However, little evidence exists regarding these patients’ vulnerability to COVID-19 post-vaccination. Thus, we evaluated the risk of COVID-19 in patients with kidney disease compared to individuals without kidney disease according to vaccination status. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean nationwide COVID-19 registry linked with National Health Insurance Service claims data (2018-2021). Among individuals aged 12 years or older, 2 separate cohorts were constructed: a COVID-19-vaccinated cohort and an unvaccinated cohort. Within each cohort, the risk of COVID-19 infection and all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and emergency room visits within 30 days of COVID-19 infection were compared between patients with and without kidney disease. To adjust for potential confounding, we used propensity score matching. Hazard ratios (HRs) for each outcome were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: We identified 785,390 and 836,490 individuals in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, respectively. Compared to patients without kidney disease, patients with kidney disease were at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection in both the vaccinated cohort (HR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.16) and the unvaccinated cohort (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.20). Likewise, patients with kidney disease generally were at higher risk for severe clinical outcomes within 30 days of COVID-19 infection. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed generally consistent results. CONCLUSIONS Our study observed excess risk of COVID-19 in patients with kidney disease, highlighting the importance of ongoing attention to these patients even post-vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with kidney disease have been prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination due to their susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. However, little evidence exists regarding these patients’ vulnerability to COVID-19 post-vaccination. Thus, we evaluated the risk of COVID-19 in patients with kidney disease compared to individuals without kidney disease according to vaccination status. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean nationwide COVID-19 registry linked with National Health Insurance Service claims data (2018-2021). Among individuals aged 12 years or older, 2 separate cohorts were constructed: a COVID-19-vaccinated cohort and an unvaccinated cohort. Within each cohort, the risk of COVID-19 infection and all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and emergency room visits within 30 days of COVID-19 infection were compared between patients with and without kidney disease. To adjust for potential confounding, we used propensity score matching. Hazard ratios (HRs) for each outcome were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: We identified 785,390 and 836,490 individuals in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, respectively. Compared to patients without kidney disease, patients with kidney disease were at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection in both the vaccinated cohort (HR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.16) and the unvaccinated cohort (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.20). Likewise, patients with kidney disease generally were at higher risk for severe clinical outcomes within 30 days of COVID-19 infection. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed generally consistent results. CONCLUSIONS Our study observed excess risk of COVID-19 in patients with kidney disease, highlighting the importance of ongoing attention to these patients even post-vaccination.