This review summarizes the establishment of the 2025 Dietary Reference Intakes for Koreans (KDRIs), the third national standard for nutrient reference values in Korea. The 2025KDRIs build on lessons from revisions in 2010, 2015, and 2020, and chart a path forward by addressing 4 priorities: upgrading the scientific evidence base through systematic evaluation, strengthening intake monitoring using national survey data, advancing international harmonization, and responding to changes in the nutrition and health environment, including those associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The scientific basis of the KDRIs was advanced by systematically evaluating the findings across exposure indicators, health assessment indicators, and the health outcomes, and reorganizing the indicators to estimate the nutrient requirements. Adequate Intake was set using explicit criteria when an Estimated Average Requirement could not be derived, data gaps, uncertain outcomes, and limited representativeness were documented. Key inputs, including coefficients of variation and uncertainty factors, as well as life stage estimation procedures, were re-evaluated in alignment with current evidence and international standards. The 2025 KDRIs incorporate intake evidence from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to inform policy and practice and support intake monitoring. For international harmonization, the NUQUEST-based literature framework was updated, and recent DRIs from other countries were compared. The shifts in anthropometric characteristics and dietary intake patterns observed during the COVID-19 pandemic were considered to reflect a changing context. The review identified remaining challenges for future revisions, including validating Koreanspecific indicators, developing evidence for infants and older adults, stronger translation of reference values into policy and practice, prioritizing of nutrients for future review within the 5-year revision cycle. Together, these advances will position the 2025 KDRIs as a science-based national reference integrating policy, practice, and evidence to support implementation aimed at improving nutritional status and healthy life expectancy in Korea.

Objectives: This study, part of the ongoing Korean National Burden of Disease (KNBD) updates, assesses disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and disability-adjusted life expectancy (DALE) in Korea, taking into account the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 and emphasizing the importance of analyzing these metrics jointly. Methods: Data were obtained from Statistics Korea, the National Health Insurance Service, and the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. DALYs and DALE were calculated using an incidence-based approach, following disease classification, disability weights, and estimation procedures consistent with prior KNBD research. Results: Compared with earlier estimates, DALYs showed a slight decline in 2020 followed by an increase in 2021, with this pattern observed across all income quintiles. For DALE, both men and women experienced modest gains relative to earlier studies; however, a decrease occurred across all income levels in 2021 compared with 2020. Regional disparities in DALE also narrowed beginning in 2020, with a more marked reduction among women. Conclusions Unlike previous studies, this research presents DALYs and DALE concurrently, offering a more comprehensive perspective on summary measures of population health. The post-2020 rise in DALYs underscores the growing need for effective chronic disease management. Additionally, widening income-based disparities in DALE highlight the urgency of addressing health inequities. Continued monitoring and updates of DALYs and DALE are necessary to understand and respond to these evolving trends.

Legal risks and liability issues in medical practice serve as a primary catalyst for the current collapse of essential healthcare services in Korea. Currently, medical disputes in Korea are disproportionately focused on criminal prosecutions and high-damages civil litigation. This punitive approach fosters a culture of concealment, encourages defensive medicine, and accelerates the exodus of medical professionals from essential fields. Ultimately, this cycle deprives the system of opportunities for improvement and poses a significant threat to patient safety. In contrast, many advanced nations have adopted principles of “Just Culture” and “Safe Space,” prioritizing non-punitive reporting and systemic root-cause analysis over individual retribution. To address these issues, this paper proposes four key strategies: First, the establishment of an independent “Patient Safety Investigation Agency” to objectively investigate incidents and identify systemic flaws. Second, a transition from criminal punishment to licensing board-led management, focusing on re-education and counseling to maintain quality of care. Third, the enactment of “Apology Laws” to ensure that expressions of regret or apologies cannot be used as legal evidence of liability, thereby fostering trust and psychological recovery. Finally, the creation of a “Patient Safety Fund” to provide prompt and sufficient public compensation to victims regardless of proven negligence. In conclusion, it is imperative to shift the paradigm by defining medical accidents as “system failures” rather than individual faults. Strengthening the social safety net will encourage medical professionals to return to essential care and build a sustainable healthcare environment centered on patient safety.

In October 2024, the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki (DoH) underwent comprehensive updates that incorporated feedback from global experts and stakeholders. The revised DoH continues to serve as a cornerstone for international and national regulations on medical research ethics. This paper aims to delve into the 2024 amendments to DoH and assesses their impact on South Korea’s Bioethics and Safety Act (Bioethics Act). This paper analyses the congruences and gaps between the revised DoH and the current Bioethics Act, examining the alignment and gaps between the current Bioethics Act and the revised DoH.This study identified necessary revisions to enhance the ethical conduct of medical research in Korea in accordance with international standards. A comparison between the principles of the revised DoH and the provisions of the Bioethics Act revealed essential adjustments required to align the Bioethics Act with updated ethical guidelines. These findings underscore the broader implications for Korea's regulatory framework on human research ethics, emphasizing the need for a strategic integration of global ethical standards into the country’s legal structure.The revised DoH emphasizes the active role of research participants and the fair inclusion of vulnerable groups. In Korea, the Bioethics Act, last revised in 2013, aligns closely with the DoH but requires further updates to reflect the 2024 amendments.

Purpose: We aimed to derive insights by analyzing the results of a patient safety awareness survey conducted by the Regional Patient Safety Center of the Korean Medical Association. Methods: Survey questions were developed in three domains: sociodemographic characteristics, patient safety awareness, and patient safety education needs. An online anonymous survey targeting Korean physicians was conducted annually from 2021 to 2023. Chi-square tests were used to verify differences in responses by year and sociodemographic characteristics. Results: A total of 774 physicians participated in the survey over the three-year period. Approximately half of the participants were still assessed to have insufficient knowledge about patient safety, and no clear year-over-year improvement was observed. Additionally, while patient safety incidents appeared common, the proportion of respondents who reported incidents remained around 20%. However, participants showed high levels of agreement or engagement in patient participation activities related to patient safety (over 90%), with 60% having previously received patient safety-related education, and nearly 90% expressing willingness to participate in future education. The findings also highlighted a particular urgency in improving patient safety awareness among clinic-based physicians. Conclusion Promoting awareness of patient safety incident reporting methods and encouraging clinic-based physicians to report incidents should be prioritized. The study’s findings will provide a foundation for more effectively fostering physician engagement in patient safety improvement activities.

Objective: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) are effective in treating gaming disorder (GD). However, studies have not comprehensively evaluated the most effective NPIs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of NPIs on the prevention and reduction of GD in the general population with GD. Methods: We searched five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) for English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published till May 12, 2024, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB2). Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effect model, with effect sizes calculated using Hedges’s g and heterogeneity assessed using I2 statistics. Results: A total of 18 RCTs involving 1,950 participants were included. The NPIs included psychotherapy, behavioral interventions, and other strategies. The pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in GD severity (Hedges’s g=-0.82; 95% confidence interval, -1.23 to -0.52; I2=90.36%). Psychotherapy, particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy, showed the most substantial effect (10 studies, 1,036 participants; Hedges’s g=-1.34). Behavioral interventions (4 studies, 456 participants) and prevention-focused interventions (6 studies, 1,164 participants) had smaller but positive effects. Subgroup analyses revealed greater effectiveness of treatment interventions in adults than in adolescents. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results despite high heterogeneity (I2=90.36%). Conclusion NPIs, particularly psychotherapy, are effective in reducing GD severity. However, more high-quality RCTs are needed robust, evidence-based treatment guidelines.

Objective: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) are effective in treating gaming disorder (GD). However, studies have not comprehensively evaluated the most effective NPIs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of NPIs on the prevention and reduction of GD in the general population with GD. Methods: We searched five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) for English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published till May 12, 2024, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB2). Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effect model, with effect sizes calculated using Hedges’s g and heterogeneity assessed using I2 statistics. Results: A total of 18 RCTs involving 1,950 participants were included. The NPIs included psychotherapy, behavioral interventions, and other strategies. The pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in GD severity (Hedges’s g=-0.82; 95% confidence interval, -1.23 to -0.52; I2=90.36%). Psychotherapy, particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy, showed the most substantial effect (10 studies, 1,036 participants; Hedges’s g=-1.34). Behavioral interventions (4 studies, 456 participants) and prevention-focused interventions (6 studies, 1,164 participants) had smaller but positive effects. Subgroup analyses revealed greater effectiveness of treatment interventions in adults than in adolescents. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results despite high heterogeneity (I2=90.36%). Conclusion NPIs, particularly psychotherapy, are effective in reducing GD severity. However, more high-quality RCTs are needed robust, evidence-based treatment guidelines.

In October 2024, the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki (DoH) underwent comprehensive updates that incorporated feedback from global experts and stakeholders. The revised DoH continues to serve as a cornerstone for international and national regulations on medical research ethics. This paper aims to delve into the 2024 amendments to DoH and assesses their impact on South Korea’s Bioethics and Safety Act (Bioethics Act). This paper analyses the congruences and gaps between the revised DoH and the current Bioethics Act, examining the alignment and gaps between the current Bioethics Act and the revised DoH.This study identified necessary revisions to enhance the ethical conduct of medical research in Korea in accordance with international standards. A comparison between the principles of the revised DoH and the provisions of the Bioethics Act revealed essential adjustments required to align the Bioethics Act with updated ethical guidelines. These findings underscore the broader implications for Korea's regulatory framework on human research ethics, emphasizing the need for a strategic integration of global ethical standards into the country’s legal structure.The revised DoH emphasizes the active role of research participants and the fair inclusion of vulnerable groups. In Korea, the Bioethics Act, last revised in 2013, aligns closely with the DoH but requires further updates to reflect the 2024 amendments.

Purpose: We aimed to derive insights by analyzing the results of a patient safety awareness survey conducted by the Regional Patient Safety Center of the Korean Medical Association. Methods: Survey questions were developed in three domains: sociodemographic characteristics, patient safety awareness, and patient safety education needs. An online anonymous survey targeting Korean physicians was conducted annually from 2021 to 2023. Chi-square tests were used to verify differences in responses by year and sociodemographic characteristics. Results: A total of 774 physicians participated in the survey over the three-year period. Approximately half of the participants were still assessed to have insufficient knowledge about patient safety, and no clear year-over-year improvement was observed. Additionally, while patient safety incidents appeared common, the proportion of respondents who reported incidents remained around 20%. However, participants showed high levels of agreement or engagement in patient participation activities related to patient safety (over 90%), with 60% having previously received patient safety-related education, and nearly 90% expressing willingness to participate in future education. The findings also highlighted a particular urgency in improving patient safety awareness among clinic-based physicians. Conclusion Promoting awareness of patient safety incident reporting methods and encouraging clinic-based physicians to report incidents should be prioritized. The study’s findings will provide a foundation for more effectively fostering physician engagement in patient safety improvement activities.

Objective: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) are effective in treating gaming disorder (GD). However, studies have not comprehensively evaluated the most effective NPIs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of NPIs on the prevention and reduction of GD in the general population with GD. Methods: We searched five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) for English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published till May 12, 2024, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB2). Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effect model, with effect sizes calculated using Hedges’s g and heterogeneity assessed using I2 statistics. Results: A total of 18 RCTs involving 1,950 participants were included. The NPIs included psychotherapy, behavioral interventions, and other strategies. The pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in GD severity (Hedges’s g=-0.82; 95% confidence interval, -1.23 to -0.52; I2=90.36%). Psychotherapy, particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy, showed the most substantial effect (10 studies, 1,036 participants; Hedges’s g=-1.34). Behavioral interventions (4 studies, 456 participants) and prevention-focused interventions (6 studies, 1,164 participants) had smaller but positive effects. Subgroup analyses revealed greater effectiveness of treatment interventions in adults than in adolescents. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results despite high heterogeneity (I2=90.36%). Conclusion NPIs, particularly psychotherapy, are effective in reducing GD severity. However, more high-quality RCTs are needed robust, evidence-based treatment guidelines.