Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

Objective: While using digital technologies for social health is widely acknowledged, the relationship between loneliness, social isolation, and digital health literacy remains unknown. This study aimed to assess the levels of loneliness, social isolation, and digital health literacy in older women living alone and to explore the associations between these factors. Methods: In August 2021, a cross-sectional survey was conducted on 145 older women living alone, selected using convenience sampling. The study used the University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale (version 3), Lubben Social Network Scale-6, and Digital Health Technology Literacy-Assessment Questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Mann–Whitney U test, the Kruskal–Wallis test, Spearman’s rho correlation, and a generalized linear model (GLM). Results: Of the participants, 22.8% (n=33) reported moderate loneliness, 20.7% (n=30) reported severe loneliness, and 36.6% (n=53) were at risk for social isolation. The mean digital health literacy score among participants was 4.85 (SD=6.92), which is relatively low. Importantly, our findings using a GLM to control for covariates revealed a significant association between loneliness (B=-0.013, p=0.018) and digital health literacy. Conclusion The increased loneliness experienced during the pandemic may contribute to low digital health literacy, alienating these individuals from the benefits of digital technologies. Therefore, in developing digital health programs or policies, it is imperative to consider the psychosocial status of individuals, including loneliness, while enhancing digital health literacy.

Objective: Stigma influences perceptions of mental illness and novel diseases like coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), often impeding healthcare access despite advancements in medical treatment. This study compares the stigma associated with COVID-19 and mental illness to identify factors that could help reduce stigma. Methods: An online survey was conducted in May 2023 among 1,500 participants aged 19 to 65 in South Korea, using a panel from Embrain, an online survey service. The survey assessed stigma and distress related to COVID-19 and mental illness using a validated questionnaire. It collected demographic and clinical data, evaluated COVID-19-related stigma, fear, and knowledge, and measured prejudice and attitudes toward psychiatric treatment. Personality traits were assessed using the Big Five Inventory (BFI)-10. Factors significantly associated with stigma scores were entered into linear regression analysis. Results: COVID-19-related stigma scores were significantly negatively correlated with knowledge of COVID-19 and positively correlated with fear of infection and age. Individuals with a history of COVID-19 infection had significantly lower scores on COVID-19-related stigma. Similarly, mental illness stigma was negatively correlated with knowledge of psychiatric treatment and positively correlated with age, as well as conscientiousness and neuroticism in the BFI. Personal experience with individuals with mental illness was associated with significantly lower stigma scores. Conclusion This study suggests that the mechanism-making stigma was similar in cases of traditional mental illness and a novel infectious disease. Both cognitive and experiential factors influence stigma. Educating the public about the disease and enabling interactions with affected individuals emerge as effective strategies for stigma reduction.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Background/Aims: Adiponectin, a hormone primarily produced by adipocytes, typically shows an inverse relationship with body mass index (BMI). However, some studies have reported a positive correlation between the two. Thus, this study aimed to examine the relationship between adiponectin level and BMI in diabetic patients, focusing on the impact of past obesity on current adiponectin levels. Methods: We conducted an observational study analyzing data from 323 diabetic patients at Kyungpook National University Hospital. Based on past and current BMIs, participants were categorized into never-obese (nn, n = 106), previously obese (on, n = 43), and persistently obese (oo, n = 73) groups based on a BMI threshold of 25 kg/m2. Adiponectin level and BMI were key variables. Kaplan–Meier analysis assessed their impact on all-cause mortality up to August 2023, with survival differences based on adiponectin quartiles and follow-up starting from patient enrollment (2010–2015). Results: The analysis revealed a significant inverse correlation between adiponectin level and past maximum BMI. The on group exhibited approximately 10% lower adiponectin levels compared to the nn group. This association remained significant after adjusting for current BMI, age, and sex, highlighting the lasting influence of previous obesity on adiponectin levels. Furthermore, survival analysis indicated that patients in the lowest adiponectin quartile had reduced survival, with a statistically significant trend (p = 0.062). Conclusions Findings of this study suggest that lower adiponectin levels, potentially reflecting past obesity, are associated with decreased survival in diabetic patients, underscoring a critical role of adiponectin in long-term health outcomes.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Objective: To test the performance of an artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) designed for fullfield digital mammography (FFDM) when applied to synthetic mammography (SM). Materials and Methods: We analyzed 501 women (mean age, 57 ± 11 years) who underwent preoperative mammography and breast cancer surgery. This cohort consisted of 1002 breasts, comprising 517 with cancer and 485 without. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and FFDM during the preoperative workup. The SM is routinely reconstructed using DBT. Commercial AI-CAD (Lunit Insight MMG, version 1.1.7.2) was retrospectively applied to SM and FFDM to calculate the abnormality scores for each breast. The median abnormality scores were compared for the 517 breasts with cancer using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Calibration curves of abnormality scores were evaluated. The discrimination performance was analyzed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using a 10% preset threshold. Sensitivity and specificity were further analyzed according to the mammographic and pathological characteristics.The results of SM and FFDM were compared. Results: AI-CAD demonstrated a significantly lower median abnormality score (71% vs. 96%, P < 0.001) and poorer calibration performance for SM than for FFDM. SM exhibited lower sensitivity (76.2% vs. 82.8%, P < 0.001), higher specificity (95.5% vs.91.8%, P < 0.001), and comparable AUC (0.86 vs. 0.87, P = 0.127) than FFDM. SM showed lower sensitivity than FFDM in asymptomatic breasts, dense breasts, ductal carcinoma in situ, T1, N0, and hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative cancers but showed higher specificity in non-cancerous dense breasts. Conclusion AI-CAD showed lower abnormality scores and reduced calibration performance for SM than for FFDM.Furthermore, the 10% preset threshold resulted in different discrimination performances for the SM. Given these limitations, off-label application of the current AI-CAD to SM should be avoided.