Purpose: This study aimed to identify core domains for pre-registered nurses by comparing licensing competencies with program outcomes (POs) in undergraduate nursing education. This was accomplished in preparation for the transition of the Korean Nurse Licensing Examination (KNLE) from a tradition seven-subject format to a newly integrated, competency-based single-subject format that reflects current trends in nursing assessment. Methods: A literature review and survey were conducted. From 828 studies retrieved via PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar using keywords such as “newly graduated registered nurses” and “competency OR competence,” 18 were selected according to pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Documents from national and international nursing organizations were included to extract relevant licensing competencies. We also reviewed POs from all undergraduate nursing schools in South Korea to align educational outcomes with the identified core domains. Results: The core domains identified were clinical performance and decision-making, professional attitudes and ethics, communication and interpersonal skills, leadership and teamwork, quality improvement and safety, health promotion and prevention, and information technology and digital health. These domains showed strong alignment with POs under the fourth-cycle accreditation standards. Conclusion It concludes the seven core domains will be appropriate for evaluating pre-registered nurses in the integrated KNLE. Based on the seven identified core domains, expert consensus should be sought in the next phase to support the development of integrated, competency-based test items grounded in these domains.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify core domains for pre-registered nurses by comparing licensing competencies with program outcomes (POs) in undergraduate nursing education. This was accomplished in preparation for the transition of the Korean Nurse Licensing Examination (KNLE) from a tradition seven-subject format to a newly integrated, competency-based single-subject format that reflects current trends in nursing assessment. Methods: A literature review and survey were conducted. From 828 studies retrieved via PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar using keywords such as “newly graduated registered nurses” and “competency OR competence,” 18 were selected according to pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Documents from national and international nursing organizations were included to extract relevant licensing competencies. We also reviewed POs from all undergraduate nursing schools in South Korea to align educational outcomes with the identified core domains. Results: The core domains identified were clinical performance and decision-making, professional attitudes and ethics, communication and interpersonal skills, leadership and teamwork, quality improvement and safety, health promotion and prevention, and information technology and digital health. These domains showed strong alignment with POs under the fourth-cycle accreditation standards. Conclusion It concludes the seven core domains will be appropriate for evaluating pre-registered nurses in the integrated KNLE. Based on the seven identified core domains, expert consensus should be sought in the next phase to support the development of integrated, competency-based test items grounded in these domains.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify core domains for pre-registered nurses by comparing licensing competencies with program outcomes (POs) in undergraduate nursing education. This was accomplished in preparation for the transition of the Korean Nurse Licensing Examination (KNLE) from a tradition seven-subject format to a newly integrated, competency-based single-subject format that reflects current trends in nursing assessment. Methods: A literature review and survey were conducted. From 828 studies retrieved via PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar using keywords such as “newly graduated registered nurses” and “competency OR competence,” 18 were selected according to pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Documents from national and international nursing organizations were included to extract relevant licensing competencies. We also reviewed POs from all undergraduate nursing schools in South Korea to align educational outcomes with the identified core domains. Results: The core domains identified were clinical performance and decision-making, professional attitudes and ethics, communication and interpersonal skills, leadership and teamwork, quality improvement and safety, health promotion and prevention, and information technology and digital health. These domains showed strong alignment with POs under the fourth-cycle accreditation standards. Conclusion It concludes the seven core domains will be appropriate for evaluating pre-registered nurses in the integrated KNLE. Based on the seven identified core domains, expert consensus should be sought in the next phase to support the development of integrated, competency-based test items grounded in these domains.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify core domains for pre-registered nurses by comparing licensing competencies with program outcomes (POs) in undergraduate nursing education. This was accomplished in preparation for the transition of the Korean Nurse Licensing Examination (KNLE) from a tradition seven-subject format to a newly integrated, competency-based single-subject format that reflects current trends in nursing assessment. Methods: A literature review and survey were conducted. From 828 studies retrieved via PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar using keywords such as “newly graduated registered nurses” and “competency OR competence,” 18 were selected according to pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Documents from national and international nursing organizations were included to extract relevant licensing competencies. We also reviewed POs from all undergraduate nursing schools in South Korea to align educational outcomes with the identified core domains. Results: The core domains identified were clinical performance and decision-making, professional attitudes and ethics, communication and interpersonal skills, leadership and teamwork, quality improvement and safety, health promotion and prevention, and information technology and digital health. These domains showed strong alignment with POs under the fourth-cycle accreditation standards. Conclusion It concludes the seven core domains will be appropriate for evaluating pre-registered nurses in the integrated KNLE. Based on the seven identified core domains, expert consensus should be sought in the next phase to support the development of integrated, competency-based test items grounded in these domains.

Treatment challenges persist in advanced lung cancer despite the development of therapies beyond the traditional platinum-based chemotherapy. The early 2000s marked a shift to tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting epidermal growth factor receptor, ushering in personalized genetic-based treatment. A further significant advance was the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), especially for non–small cell lung cancer. These target programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4, which enhanced the immune response against tumor cells. However, not all patients respond, and immune-related toxicities arise. This review emphasizes identifying biomarkers for ICI response prediction. While PD-L1 is a widely used, validated biomarker, its predictive accuracy is imperfect. Investigating tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, tertiary lymphoid structure, and emerging biomarkers such as high endothelial venule, Human leukocyte antigen class I, T-cell immunoreceptors with Ig and ITIM domains, and lymphocyte activation gene-3 counts is promising. Understanding and exploring additional predictive biomarkers for ICI response are crucial for enhancing patient stratification and overall care in lung cancer treatment.

Objective: The aim of the present study was to explore whether or not cancer patients’ viral anxiety and depression during the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic were associated with a fear of cancer progression. We also assessed whether coping strategies affected the relationship. Methods: The present cross-sectional survey included cancer patients who visited Ulsan University Hospital in Ulsan, Korea. The participants’ demographic information and responses to the following symptoms rating scales were collected: Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic–6; Patient Health Questionnaire–9; Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire-short version; or Fear of Progression Questionnaire-short version. Results: Of the 558 cancer patients surveyed, 25 (4.5%) reported that their treatment schedule was delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The patients’ fear of progression was found to be related to age (β=-0.08; p=0.011), viral anxiety (β=0.40; p<0.001), depression (β=0.26; p<0.001), and catastrophizing coping strategies (β=0.15; p=0.004), for an overall adjusted R2 of 0.46 (F=66.8; p<0.001). Mediation analysis showed that viral anxiety and depression were directly associated with fear of progression, while catastrophizing mediated this relationship. Conclusion Fear of progression in cancer patients was associated with viral anxiety, depression, and maladaptive coping techniques, such as catastrophizing, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose: To compare anterior biometry measurements using placido-scanning-slit topography, rotating Scheimpflug tomography, and swept-source optical coherence tomography. Methods: A retrospective review consisted of 80 eyes of 49 participants who underwent anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), and keratometry examination on the same day. We used placido-scanning-slit topography (ORBscan II), rotating Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam HR), and swept-source optical coherence tomography (CASIA SS1000). The intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement and differences between measurements. Results: The mean ACD values were 2.88 ± 0.43, 2.82 ± 0.50, and 2.68 ± 0.44 mm; and the mean CCT values were 536.96 ± 31.19, 543.79 ± 31.04, and 561.41 ± 32.60 μm; and the mean keratometry (Km) were 43.81 ± 1.69, 43.81 ± 1.77, and 44.65 ± 1.95 diopters; as measured by CASIA SS-1000, Pentacam HR, and ORBscan II, respectively. Among the three devices, ACD was deepest to shallowest in the order of CASIA SS-1000, Pentacam HR, and ORBscan II (p < 0.05). The CCT was thickest to thinnest in the order of ORBscan II, Pentacam HR, and CASIA SS-1000 (p < 0.05). No significant differences in Km values were examined between CASIA SS-1000 and Pentacam HR, whereas ORBscan II overestimated Km with a statistically significant difference compared to the other two devices. Conclusions High level of agreement was found between CASIA SS-1000 and Pentacam HR for anterior parameters, including ACD, CCT, and Km, suggesting interchangeability. However, ORBscan II measurements differed considerably with the measurements obtained from the other two devices; therefore, it should not be used interchangeably. However, further studies with repeatability test should be considered in order to elucidate the reliability of each device.

The COVID-19 curve seesawed and reached the fourth pandemic in July 2021. Since the first three waves, the focus has been on achieving herd immunity through vaccination while a lot of manpower is used for quarantine. However, we have not been able to prevent the fourth wave. The causes are thought to be related to people who doubt the safety of the vaccine and refuse it or violate quarantine guidelines such as social distancing. This study examined guidelines for preventing and controlling COVID-19, the accuracy of vaccination-related information, and described quarantine measures including for those who completed vaccination. In conclusion, prevention and vaccination are the most effective countermeasures against COVID-19. We recommend people vaccination with self-quarantine. Also, it is necessary to make large investments to protect and support nurses in future pandemics.

The COVID-19 curve seesawed and reached the fourth pandemic in July 2021. Since the first three waves, the focus has been on achieving herd immunity through vaccination while a lot of manpower is used for quarantine. However, we have not been able to prevent the fourth wave. The causes are thought to be related to people who doubt the safety of the vaccine and refuse it or violate quarantine guidelines such as social distancing. This study examined guidelines for preventing and controlling COVID-19, the accuracy of vaccination-related information, and described quarantine measures including for those who completed vaccination. In conclusion, prevention and vaccination are the most effective countermeasures against COVID-19. We recommend people vaccination with self-quarantine. Also, it is necessary to make large investments to protect and support nurses in future pandemics.

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of the Kane formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in comparison with existing formulas by incorporating optional variables into calculation. Materials and Methods: This retrospective review consisted of 78 eyes of patients who had undergone uneventful phacoemulsification with intraocular implantation at Severance Hospital in Seoul, Korea between February 2020 and January 2021. The Kane formula was compared with six of the existing IOL formulas (SRK/T, Hoffer-Q, Haigis, Holladay1, Holladay2, Barrett Universal II) based on the mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and the percentages of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.25D, ±0.50D, and ±1.00D. Results: The Barrett Universal II formula demonstrated the lowest MAEs (0.26±0.17D), MedAEs (0.28D), and percentage of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.25D, ± 0.50D, and ±1.00D, although there was no statistically significant difference between Barrett Universal II-SRK/T (p=0.06), and Barrett Universal II-Kane formula (p<0.51). Following the Barrett Universal II formula, the Kane formula demonstrated the second most accurate formula with MAEs (0.30±0.19D) and MedAEs (0.28D). However, no statistical difference was shown between Kane-Barrett Universal II (p=0.51) and Kane-SRK/T (p=0.14). Conclusion Although slightly better refractory outcome was noted in the Barrett Universal II formula, the performance of the Kane formula in refractive prediction was comparable in IOL power calculation, marking its superiority over many conventional IOL formulas, such as HofferQ, Haigis, Holladay1, and Holladay2.