The University of Tokyo Disability Services Office and the University of Tokyo Hospital have striven to advance the inclusion of individuals with disabilities and to encourage the co-production of research as well as mental health services with peer support workers. In convergence with these endeavors, the Center for Diversity in Medical Education and Research (CDMER) was founded in 2021. The Center aims to establish an environment and culture that facilitates the participation and success of medical professionals with disabilities. For this purpose, it is essential to integrate the perspective of the social model of disability into medical education and promote co-production in the medical field, which is among the most challenging areas that can realize co-production. The Center is involved in various educational and research activities, including managing educational programs for medical students and supporting student-led research.

Purpose: This study examined the relationship between achievement goals and work values, and the influence of work values on achievement goals.Methods: The subjects were 538 students from four Physical Therapist Vocational Schools. Achievement goals and work values were measured with a questionnaire survey, and Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis were performed.Results: There was a positive significant correlation between achievement goals and work values. Mastery goals were positively influenced by self-worth and social evaluation, and negatively influenced by the comfortable working environments. Performance approach goals and performance avoidance goals were positively influenced by social evaluation and comfortable working environments, and negatively influenced by self-worth and independence from the organization.Conclusion: Achievement goals and work values were related, and work values were suggested to influence achievement goals.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of washout-parametric imaging (WOPI) with that of conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (cCEUS) in differentiating focal liver lesions (FLLs). Methods: A total of 181 FLLs were imaged with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using Sonazoid, and the recordings were captured for 10 minutes in a prospective setting. WOPI was constructed from three images, depicting the arterial phase (peak enhancement), the early portal venous phase (1-minute post-injection), and the vasculo-Kupffer phase (5 or 10 minutes post-injection). The intensity variations in these images were color-coded and superimposed to produce a single image representing the washout timing across the lesions. From the 181 FLLs, 30 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), 30 non-HCC malignancies, and 30 benign lesions were randomly selected for an observer study. Both techniques (cCEUS and WOPI) were evaluated by four off-site readers. They classified each lesion as benign or malignant using a continuous rating scale, with the endpoints representing "definitely benign" and "definitely malignant." The diagnostic performance of cCEUS and WOPI was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with the DeLong test. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The difference in average AUC values between WOPI and cCEUS was 0.0062 (95% confidence interval, -0.0161 to 0.0285), indicating no significant difference between techniques. The interobserver agreement was higher for WOPI (ICC, 0.77) than cCEUS (ICC, 0.67). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of WOPI is comparable to that of cCEUS in differentiating FLLs, with superior interobserver agreement.