Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: Osteoporosis is a significant public health issue in aging populations. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, underdiagnosis and undertreatment remain prevalent even in patients with recent fractures. This study examined 20-year trends (2002– 2022) in anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) usage in South Korea. Methods: Data from the Korean National Health Information Database were retrospectively analyzed. The study included individuals aged ≥50 years and analyzed prescription trends, medication adherence, measured by the medication possession ratio (MPR), and treatment initiation rates post-fracture. The AOMs examined included bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, denosumab (DMAB), teriparatide (TPTD), and romosozumab (ROMO). Results: Over two decades, AOM use has shifted significantly from oral to injectable formulations, with injectables surpassing oral medications in 2020; from 397,440 prescriptions in 2016 to 1,162,779 in 2022. Prescriptions for DMAB surged following its approval as a first-line therapy in 2019, increasing 2.65 times from 217,606 in 2019 to 575,595 in 2022. The MPR improved from 35.4% in 2003 to 73.2% in 2021, with females demonstrating higher adherence than males. Post-fracture treatment rates increased from 31.1% in 2006 to 39.9% in 2021 but remained below 50%. Vertebral fractures had the highest treatment initiation rates, while anabolic agents, such as TPTD and ROMO were underprescribed despite their efficacy. Conclusions This 20-year analysis highlights significant progress in osteoporosis management in South Korea, including a shift towards injectable therapies and improved adherence. However, the persistent undertreatment of high-risk patients underscores the requirement for enhanced access to anabolic agents, clinician education, and policy reforms to optimize post-fracture care.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: Osteoporosis is a significant public health issue in aging populations. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, underdiagnosis and undertreatment remain prevalent even in patients with recent fractures. This study examined 20-year trends (2002– 2022) in anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) usage in South Korea. Methods: Data from the Korean National Health Information Database were retrospectively analyzed. The study included individuals aged ≥50 years and analyzed prescription trends, medication adherence, measured by the medication possession ratio (MPR), and treatment initiation rates post-fracture. The AOMs examined included bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, denosumab (DMAB), teriparatide (TPTD), and romosozumab (ROMO). Results: Over two decades, AOM use has shifted significantly from oral to injectable formulations, with injectables surpassing oral medications in 2020; from 397,440 prescriptions in 2016 to 1,162,779 in 2022. Prescriptions for DMAB surged following its approval as a first-line therapy in 2019, increasing 2.65 times from 217,606 in 2019 to 575,595 in 2022. The MPR improved from 35.4% in 2003 to 73.2% in 2021, with females demonstrating higher adherence than males. Post-fracture treatment rates increased from 31.1% in 2006 to 39.9% in 2021 but remained below 50%. Vertebral fractures had the highest treatment initiation rates, while anabolic agents, such as TPTD and ROMO were underprescribed despite their efficacy. Conclusions This 20-year analysis highlights significant progress in osteoporosis management in South Korea, including a shift towards injectable therapies and improved adherence. However, the persistent undertreatment of high-risk patients underscores the requirement for enhanced access to anabolic agents, clinician education, and policy reforms to optimize post-fracture care.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: Osteoporosis is a significant public health issue in aging populations. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, underdiagnosis and undertreatment remain prevalent even in patients with recent fractures. This study examined 20-year trends (2002– 2022) in anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) usage in South Korea. Methods: Data from the Korean National Health Information Database were retrospectively analyzed. The study included individuals aged ≥50 years and analyzed prescription trends, medication adherence, measured by the medication possession ratio (MPR), and treatment initiation rates post-fracture. The AOMs examined included bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, denosumab (DMAB), teriparatide (TPTD), and romosozumab (ROMO). Results: Over two decades, AOM use has shifted significantly from oral to injectable formulations, with injectables surpassing oral medications in 2020; from 397,440 prescriptions in 2016 to 1,162,779 in 2022. Prescriptions for DMAB surged following its approval as a first-line therapy in 2019, increasing 2.65 times from 217,606 in 2019 to 575,595 in 2022. The MPR improved from 35.4% in 2003 to 73.2% in 2021, with females demonstrating higher adherence than males. Post-fracture treatment rates increased from 31.1% in 2006 to 39.9% in 2021 but remained below 50%. Vertebral fractures had the highest treatment initiation rates, while anabolic agents, such as TPTD and ROMO were underprescribed despite their efficacy. Conclusions This 20-year analysis highlights significant progress in osteoporosis management in South Korea, including a shift towards injectable therapies and improved adherence. However, the persistent undertreatment of high-risk patients underscores the requirement for enhanced access to anabolic agents, clinician education, and policy reforms to optimize post-fracture care.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Objectives: In this functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we aimed to investigate the differences in brain activation between individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and typically developing (TD) individuals during perspective taking. We also examined the association between brain activation and empathic and interoceptive abilities. Methods: During scanning, participants from the ASD (n=17) and TD (n=22) groups were shown pain stimuli and asked to rate the level of the observed pain from both self- and other-perspectives. Empathic abilities, including perspective taking, were measured using an empathic questionnaire, and three dimensions of interoception were assessed: interoceptive accuracy, interoceptive sensibility, and interoceptive trait prediction errors. Results: During self-perspective taking, the ASD group exhibited greater activation in the left precuneus than the TD group. During other-perspective taking, relative hyperactivation extended to areas including the right precuneus, right superior frontal gyrus, left caudate nucleus, and left amygdala. Brain activation levels in the right superior frontal gyrus while taking other-perspective were negatively correlated with interoceptive accuracy, and those in the left caudate were negatively correlated with perspective taking ability in the ASD group. Conclusion Individuals with ASD show atypical brain activation during perspective taking. Notably, their brain regions associated with stress reactions and escape responses are overactivated when taking other-perspective. This overactivity is related to poor interoceptive accuracy, suggesting that individuals with ASD may experience difficulties with the self-other distinction or atypical embodiment when considering another person’s perspective.

Background: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol is an important marker highly associated with cardiovascular disease. Since the direct measurement of it is inefficient in terms of cost and time, it is common to estimate through the Friedewald equation developed about 50 years ago. However, various limitations exist since the Friedewald equation was not designed for Koreans. This study proposes a new low-density lipoprotein cholesterol estimation equation for South Koreans using nationally approved statistical data. Methods: This study used data from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2009 to 2019. The 18,837 subjects were used to develop the equation for estimating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. The subjects included individuals with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels directly measured among those with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total cholesterol measured. We compared twelve equations developed in the previous studies and the newly proposed equation (model 1) developed in this study with the actual low-density lipoprotein cholesterol value in various ways. Results: The low-density lipoprotein cholesterol value estimated using the estimation formula and the actual low-density lipoprotein cholesterol value were compared using the root mean squared error. When the triglyceride level was less than 400 mg/dL, the root mean squared of the model 1 was 7.96, the lowest compared to other equations, and the model 2 was 7.82. The degree of misclassification was checked according to the NECP ATP III 6 categories. As a result, the misclassification rate of the model 1 was the lowest at 18.9%, and Weighted Kappa was the highest at 0.919 (0.003), which means it significantly reduced the underestimation rate shown in other existing estimation equations. Root mean square error was also compared according to the change in triglycerides level. As the triglycerides level increased, the root mean square error showed an increasing trend in all equations, but it was confirmed that the model 1 was the lowest compared to other equations. Conclusion The newly proposed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol estimation equation showed significantly improved performance compared to the 12 existing estimation equations. The use of representative samples and external verification is required for more sophisticated estimates in the future.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to elucidate the effects of an air quality warning system (AQWS) implemented in January 2015 in Korea by analyzing changes in the incidence and exacerbation rates of environmental diseases. METHODS: Data from patients with environmental diseases were extracted from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort database from 2010 to 2019, and data on environmental risk factors were acquired from the AirKorea database. Patient and meteorological data were linked based on residential area. An interrupted time series analysis with Poisson segmented regression was used to compare the rates before and after AQWS introduction. Adjustment variables included seasonality, air pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter less than 10 μm in diameter, and ozone), temperature, and humidity. RESULTS: After AQWS implementation, the incidence of asthma gradually decreased by 20.5%. Cardiovascular disease and stroke incidence also significantly decreased (by 34.3 and 43.0%, respectively). However, no immediate or gradual decrease was identified in the exacerbation rate of any environmental disease after AQWS implementation. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to age, disability, and health insurance coverage type. Overall, the AQWS effectively mitigated the occurrence of most environmental diseases in Korea. However, the relationships between alarm system implementation and reduced incidence differed among diseases based on the characteristics of vulnerable and sensitive individuals. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that by tailoring the AQWS to demographic and sociological characteristics and providing enhanced education about the warning system, interventions can become an efficient policy tool to decrease air pollution-related health risks.