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.

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.

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.

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.

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: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.

Background/Aims: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.

Background/Aims: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.

Background/Aims: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.

Background: Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide, posing a significant threat to human health and life expectancy. Numerous existing studies explored the correlation between coal-fired power plants and cancer development. Currently, Chungcheongnam-do Province hosts 29 coal-fired power plants, constituting half of the total 58 plants across South Korea. Methods: This study assessed the cancer incidence by proximity to coal-fired power plants in Chungcheongnam-do Province, Korea. In this study, the exposed group comprised individuals residing within a 2-km radius of the coal-fired power plants, whereas the control group comprised individuals who had no prior residency within the 2-km radius of such plants or elsewhere in the province. Standardized incidence ratios were calculated using the cancer incidence cases retrieved from the National Health Insurance System data from 2007 to 2017. Results: The study found that exposed men had a 1.11 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09–1.21) times higher risk of developing all cancer types and a 1.15 (95% CI, 1.09–1.22) times higher risk of developing cancers excluding thyroid cancer compared with control men. Exposed women had a 1.05 (95% CI, 1.00–1.14) times higher risk of developing all cancer types and a 1.06 (95% CI, 0.98–1.13) times higher risk of developing cancers excluding thyroid cancer than did control women. The colorectal, liver, prostate, and bladder cancer incidence rates were significantly higher in exposed men than that in all control groups.The incidence of esophageal, stomach, liver, and lung cancers were significantly higher in exposed women compared with all control groups. Conclusion The residents near coal-fired power plants had a higher risk of developing cancer than did those living in other areas. In the future, long-term follow-up investigations in residents living in the vicinity of power plants are warranted.