Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

This study aimed to establish a foundation for future collaborations aimed at preparing for and responding to infectious diseases by examining the vaccine injury compensation programs (VICPs) of East Asian countries. We reviewed the current status of VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan by searching national government websites and reviewing relevant literature. Additionally, we conducted email inquiries targeting experts from Japan and Taiwan.Through the comprehensive analysis of VICPs in these 3 countries covered various aspects,we identified several similarities and differences in the VICPs across these countries. Whilethe governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan play a central role in supporting investigations into vaccine injuries and managing compensation procedures based on legalstatutes, they differ in terms of financial resources for compensation, the range of vaccinescovered, and the criteria for assessing causality. In the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan,compensation is typically paid in a lump sum, although the specific benefits available vary bycountry. This study on VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan provides valuable insights for the further development and management of domestic systems.

This study aimed to establish a foundation for future collaborations aimed at preparing for and responding to infectious diseases by examining the vaccine injury compensation programs (VICPs) of East Asian countries. We reviewed the current status of VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan by searching national government websites and reviewing relevant literature. Additionally, we conducted email inquiries targeting experts from Japan and Taiwan.Through the comprehensive analysis of VICPs in these 3 countries covered various aspects,we identified several similarities and differences in the VICPs across these countries. Whilethe governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan play a central role in supporting investigations into vaccine injuries and managing compensation procedures based on legalstatutes, they differ in terms of financial resources for compensation, the range of vaccinescovered, and the criteria for assessing causality. In the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan,compensation is typically paid in a lump sum, although the specific benefits available vary bycountry. This study on VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan provides valuable insights for the further development and management of domestic systems.

This study aimed to establish a foundation for future collaborations aimed at preparing for and responding to infectious diseases by examining the vaccine injury compensation programs (VICPs) of East Asian countries. We reviewed the current status of VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan by searching national government websites and reviewing relevant literature. Additionally, we conducted email inquiries targeting experts from Japan and Taiwan.Through the comprehensive analysis of VICPs in these 3 countries covered various aspects,we identified several similarities and differences in the VICPs across these countries. Whilethe governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan play a central role in supporting investigations into vaccine injuries and managing compensation procedures based on legalstatutes, they differ in terms of financial resources for compensation, the range of vaccinescovered, and the criteria for assessing causality. In the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan,compensation is typically paid in a lump sum, although the specific benefits available vary bycountry. This study on VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan provides valuable insights for the further development and management of domestic systems.

This study aimed to establish a foundation for future collaborations aimed at preparing for and responding to infectious diseases by examining the vaccine injury compensation programs (VICPs) of East Asian countries. We reviewed the current status of VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan by searching national government websites and reviewing relevant literature. Additionally, we conducted email inquiries targeting experts from Japan and Taiwan.Through the comprehensive analysis of VICPs in these 3 countries covered various aspects,we identified several similarities and differences in the VICPs across these countries. Whilethe governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan play a central role in supporting investigations into vaccine injuries and managing compensation procedures based on legalstatutes, they differ in terms of financial resources for compensation, the range of vaccinescovered, and the criteria for assessing causality. In the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan,compensation is typically paid in a lump sum, although the specific benefits available vary bycountry. This study on VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan provides valuable insights for the further development and management of domestic systems.

This study aimed to establish a foundation for future collaborations aimed at preparing for and responding to infectious diseases by examining the vaccine injury compensation programs (VICPs) of East Asian countries. We reviewed the current status of VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan by searching national government websites and reviewing relevant literature. Additionally, we conducted email inquiries targeting experts from Japan and Taiwan.Through the comprehensive analysis of VICPs in these 3 countries covered various aspects,we identified several similarities and differences in the VICPs across these countries. Whilethe governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan play a central role in supporting investigations into vaccine injuries and managing compensation procedures based on legalstatutes, they differ in terms of financial resources for compensation, the range of vaccinescovered, and the criteria for assessing causality. In the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan,compensation is typically paid in a lump sum, although the specific benefits available vary bycountry. This study on VICPs in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan provides valuable insights for the further development and management of domestic systems.

OBJECTIVES: Vaccination is one of the most important strategies to contain the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Vaccination in children is dependent on their parents, making it important to understand parents’ awareness and attitudes toward vaccines in order to devise strategies to raise vaccination rates in children. METHODS: A web-based nationwide survey was conducted among Korean parents of 7-year-old to 18-year-old children in August 2021 to estimate parents’ intention to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 and identify key factors affecting parental acceptance and hesitancy through regression analysis. RESULTS: Approximately 56.4% (575/1,019) were willing to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Contributing factors to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were being a mother (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25 to 0.52), a lower education level (aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.97), hesitancy to other childhood vaccines (aOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96), and refusal to vaccinate themselves (aOR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.20). Having older children (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.28), trusting the child’s doctor (aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.32), positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine’s effectiveness (aOR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.90 to 3.57) and perceiving the COVID-19 vaccine as low-risk (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.24) were associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Concerns about adverse reactions were the most common cause of hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS Providing parents with accurate and reliable information on vaccine effectiveness and safety is important to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in children. Differential or targeted approaches to parents according to gender, age, and their children’s age are necessary for effective communication about vaccination in children.