Objectives: This study aimed to develop a NOVA-based scoring approach for evaluating ultra- processed food (UPF) intake among Korean adults and to examine its performance. Previous studies have reported that young adults have the highest levels of UPF consumption. Accordingly, this study focused on adults aged 19–40 years and developed scoring components reflecting dietary patterns specific to Korean eating habits. Methods: Using 24-hour dietary recall data from adults aged 19–40 years in the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2021–2023), foods were classified according to the Korean-adapted NOVA system. The top 10 food groups accounting for ≥ 80% of cumulative UPF-derived energy were selected to construct the scoring components. The tool was operationalized using food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) data from the Gangwon cohort study (2022–2024). Intake frequencies were converted into scores ranging from 0 (“rarely or never”) to 5 (“≥ 1 time/day”), and summed to generate the NOVA–UPF score (range: 0–50). Results: Among 237 young adults (aged 20–49 years), the mean NOVA–UPF score was 22.9 ± 8.3. A positive association was observed between the NOVA–UPF score and FFQbased UPF energy intake (Spearman’s ρ = 0.629, P < 0.001). Cross-classification showed that 51.9% were classified into the same tertile and 94.9% into the same or adjacent tertiles, with a weighted kappa coefficient of 0.279. Conclusion This NOVA-based scoring approach may serve as a preliminary tool for assessing UPF intake in Korean young adults. Further refinement and rigorous validation using quantitative dietary assessment methods and more diverse populations are required before broader application.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Multiple myeloma (MM), a hematological malignancy, is characterized by malignant plasma cell proliferation in the bone marrow. Recent treatment advances have significantly improved patient outcomes associated with MM.In this study, we aimed to develop comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, prognosis, and treat‑ ment of MM. We identified 12 key clinical questions essential for MM management, guiding the extensive literature review and meta-analysis of the study. Our guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations by integrating patient preferences with survey data. These recommendations include current and emerging diagnostic tools, thera‑ peutic agents, and treatment strategies. By prioritizing a patient-centered approach and rigorous data analysis, these guidelines were developed to enhance MM management, both in Korea and globally.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify changes in the regional distribution of nurses from 2011 to 2020 and to measure the degree of geographic inequality in the distribution of nurses. Methods: National statistics from 2011 to 2020 were used to analyze the distribution of practicing nurses and nursing graduates by region. The degree of geographic inequality in these distributions was measured using the Gini coefficient. Results: Between 2011 and 2020, the number of nursing graduates increased significantly in the non-capital regions and medically underserved areas.However, non-capital regions observed a smaller increase in the number of practicing nurses than in the number of nursing graduates produced, while capital regions experienced a larger increase in the number of practicing nurses than in the number of nursing graduates produced. Furthermore, the degree of geographic inequality in the distribution of practicing nurses worsened between 2011 and 2020. Conclusion Effective policies to prevent the outflow of rural nurses are necessary to mitigate geographical inequality in the distribution of nurses.

Purpose: This study examined the evaluation indicators and frameworks for assessing the effectiveness of the Center for Children’s and Social Welfare Foodservice Management. Methods: A qualitative research design was used, including focus group discussions and indepth interviews cond1ucted with 26 stakeholders, such as center staff, community nutrition experts, and performance evaluation specialists. The interviews were recorded with the participants’ consent, and the transcribed data were analyzed using framework analysis to identify key patterns. Results: The findings highlight several critical issues in the current evaluation framework, including over-reliance on satisfaction surveys, insufficient utilization of checklist data, and a lack of long-term outcome measures. The participants recommended improving satisfaction surveys by diversifying the respondents and refining methodologies. Systematic data management was also highlighted as essential, particularly for data collected by center nutritionists during site visits. These data are crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of overseeing and educating cooks and staff in children’s and social welfare facilities. For the long-term outcome indicators, the participants suggested integrating national health datasets to monitor the food consumption patterns, such as fruit and vegetable intake or sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among children, and tracking medical expenses or hospitalization rates for elderly daycare center users. Well-designed intervention studies were recommended to develop more robust evaluation indicators, particularly for assessing the impact of the centers on the health and quality of life of the elderly. Conclusion Therefore, comprehensive and standardized evaluation systems should be implemented to enhance operational efficiency and service quality. The proposed evaluation scheme can better evaluate and support the health and well-being of vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, by aligning these systems with the centers’ mission of ensuring safe and nutritious food services.

Purpose: This study examined the evaluation indicators and frameworks for assessing the effectiveness of the Center for Children’s and Social Welfare Foodservice Management. Methods: A qualitative research design was used, including focus group discussions and indepth interviews cond1ucted with 26 stakeholders, such as center staff, community nutrition experts, and performance evaluation specialists. The interviews were recorded with the participants’ consent, and the transcribed data were analyzed using framework analysis to identify key patterns. Results: The findings highlight several critical issues in the current evaluation framework, including over-reliance on satisfaction surveys, insufficient utilization of checklist data, and a lack of long-term outcome measures. The participants recommended improving satisfaction surveys by diversifying the respondents and refining methodologies. Systematic data management was also highlighted as essential, particularly for data collected by center nutritionists during site visits. These data are crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of overseeing and educating cooks and staff in children’s and social welfare facilities. For the long-term outcome indicators, the participants suggested integrating national health datasets to monitor the food consumption patterns, such as fruit and vegetable intake or sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among children, and tracking medical expenses or hospitalization rates for elderly daycare center users. Well-designed intervention studies were recommended to develop more robust evaluation indicators, particularly for assessing the impact of the centers on the health and quality of life of the elderly. Conclusion Therefore, comprehensive and standardized evaluation systems should be implemented to enhance operational efficiency and service quality. The proposed evaluation scheme can better evaluate and support the health and well-being of vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, by aligning these systems with the centers’ mission of ensuring safe and nutritious food services.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify changes in the regional distribution of nurses from 2011 to 2020 and to measure the degree of geographic inequality in the distribution of nurses. Methods: National statistics from 2011 to 2020 were used to analyze the distribution of practicing nurses and nursing graduates by region. The degree of geographic inequality in these distributions was measured using the Gini coefficient. Results: Between 2011 and 2020, the number of nursing graduates increased significantly in the non-capital regions and medically underserved areas.However, non-capital regions observed a smaller increase in the number of practicing nurses than in the number of nursing graduates produced, while capital regions experienced a larger increase in the number of practicing nurses than in the number of nursing graduates produced. Furthermore, the degree of geographic inequality in the distribution of practicing nurses worsened between 2011 and 2020. Conclusion Effective policies to prevent the outflow of rural nurses are necessary to mitigate geographical inequality in the distribution of nurses.