• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.54 no.1
• /
• pp.8-16
• /
• 2021

This article aims to introduce the inception and operation of the COVID-19 International Collaborative Research Project, the world's first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) open data project for research, along with its dataset and research method, and to discuss relevant considerations for collaborative research using nationwide real-world data (RWD). COVID-19 has spread across the world since early 2020, becoming a serious global health threat to life, safety, and social and economic activities. However, insufficient RWD from patients was available to help clinicians efficiently diagnose and treat patients with COVID-19, or to provide necessary information to the government for policy-making. Countries that saw a rapid surge of infections had to focus on leveraging medical professionals to treat patients, and the circumstances made it even more difficult to promptly use COVID-19 RWD. Against this backdrop, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) of Korea decided to open its COVID-19 RWD collected through Korea's universal health insurance program, under the title of the COVID-19 International Collaborative Research Project. The dataset, consisting of 476 508 claim statements from 234 427 patients (7590 confirmed cases) and 18 691 318 claim statements of the same patients for the previous 3 years, was established and hosted on HIRA's in-house server. Researchers who applied to participate in the project uploaded analysis code on the platform prepared by HIRA, and HIRA conducted the analysis and provided outcome values. As of November 2020, analyses have been completed for 129 research projects, which have been published or are in the process of being published in prestigious journals.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.159-184
• /
• 2017

OECD MNE Guidelines ('OECD Guidelines') was set forth in 1976 as a form of annex to the OECD Declaration on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises. The objective of the OECD Guidelines is to fulfill the implementation and adoption of the Responsible Business Conduct ('RBC') among the adhering states. To further the effectiveness of the OECD Guidelines, OECD, specifically the Investment Committee of OECD, has utilized National Contact Point ('NCP') structure. According to the Procedural Guidance annexed to the OECD Guidelines, peer learning is prescribed as an important tool for promoting and facilitating the implementation procedures of the OECD Guidelines. This paper, inter alia, is mainly focusing on the peer review mechanism applicable to NCPs because negative assessments by peers are likely to harm Korea's state image and entail international criticisms even though such reviews are conducted voluntarily. In addition, the Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct ('WPRBC') decided to have a peer review of Korean NCP in 2019. This paper first outlines the meaning and current applications of the peer review mechanism, and then analyzes specific peer review cases conducted in Denmark and Belgium in 2015, and in 2016, respectively. Lastly, based on the issues handled in the peer review reports on the above states, this paper makes a few recommendations for Korean government to prepare the peer review scheduled in 2019.

• Toxicological Research
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2004

Evaluation of toxicological pathology is to some extend subjective judgments by pathologist and the accuracy of pathologist's works is based on the individual training and experiences. It has been required to establish a peer review system for toxicologic pathology and these review system has been employed by various practice of toxicological pathology. It would be pointed out that the possible causes of drifts in pathology are due to 1) lack of knowledge or experience of individual pathologists, 2) poorly maintained consistence of grading among animals in study, 3) different interpretation of findings between pathologists, or 4) pathology data processing. Example cases of diagnostic errors and current practice of peer review including tissue selection criteria, documentation and problem resolution for short-term and carcinogenicity studies were introduced. For sound regulatory system and high integrity of practice in toxicological pathology, current approaches of peer review system were reviewed.

• Asia pacific journal of information systems
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.19-35
• /
• 1998

There has been a complaint that current editorial and refereeing system of the traditional journal systems has something to be desired due to long time lag between submission and publication, improper(unfair in some sense, because no communication is allowed between reviewers and authors) review of submitted papers sometimes, and so on. This paper introduces a Web-Based Paper Review Support System, called WebReview, The system helps to reduce the time lag and allows reviewers and authors to communicate anonymously to clarify the research results, if there is any ambiguity. WebReview is implemented in Java, using Oracle as an underlying DBMS, to capture interactions between users and the system.

• Journal of Industrial Convergence
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.29-50
• /
• 2005

Audit review is the system to review the audit procedures performed and the audit opinion expressed by the independent auditors. The public audit review performed by Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) is regarded as one of the most important means to maintain the reliability of accounting information in Korea. We examinate the effect of audit review on earnings quality by using ERC (earnings response coefficient). We find that ERC of the sample group which issued the audit error reports after they were reviewed by SSB is more effective and higher than one of the non-reviewed group, matching group. We infer that the audit review system has the effectiveness in Korea.

• Journal of Applied Reliability
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.137-146
• /
• 2014

This paper is to develop Energy-FMEA for Energy Review of ISO 50001 Energy Management System. Energy Review is the core requirement of ISO 50001. This study develop Energy-FMEA and suggest Energy Review Inventory and Assessment Criteria for performing Energy-FMEA. Also, it shows case study to verify whether to proper.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.59-59
• /
• 2023

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.49
• /
• pp.277-297
• /
• 2016

Access re-review is a process to reclassify the non-disclosure documents to open accessible documents, and it has to be performed in every five years. However, current procedures of the access re-review in many archives have not been properly working, due to the shortage of the available archivists for providing enough access re-review. Although many difficult situation for the re-review such as enormous amount of re-review documents and lack of archivists, access re-review was included in the administrative evaluation list, of which it makes the re-review for just evaluating process. In this study, the access re-review of Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, which have performed by external service companies as well as the other institutions' progresses were summarized for improving access re-review process. Although Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education processed 610,000 re-review with 100,000,000 won budget for 4 years, the project has been failed to get more budget support because of the claim for the budget efficiency. The other institutions also could not focus on the actual access re-review. Considering all the points, current access re-review process is clearly required to be improved.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.79-96
• /
• 2023

This study analyzed the open peer review results for 585 papers in the field of social sciences in F1000Research, a representative OPR(Open Peer Review) platform, and checked the relationship between the number of cited-by, altmetrics and review score. In addition, by verifying whether the review score shows a moderating effect between the relationship between the utilization of the paper and the cited-by, it was confirmed whether the paper evaluated as high quality in the open review platform can promote the number of cited-by. As a result of the analysis, first, there was no significant difference in the number of cited-by between the approved and conditionally approved paper groups, but the converted review score and the number of cited-by showed a weak positive correlation (r = 0.40 - 0.60). Second, the review score showed a weak correlation with the altmetrics, and it was analyzed that review result could weakly predict the number of cited-by and social impact. Finally, it was verified that the review score performed a significant positive moderating effect (B=1.69, P < 0.01) in making the use of the paper lead to citation. As a result of the conditional effect test, it was verified that it showed the greatest effect(B=11.32, 95% CI [10.57, 12.08]) in the group of papers rated as the highest quality. Therefore, it was analyzed that the open review scores can help researchers select high quality papers and induce citations.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.43-50
• /
• 2023

Purpose: Due to the stringency of regulations related to clinical research, researchers face various requirements in the Institutional Review Board (IRB) review process. Specifically, they encounter time constraints and administrative burdens. In order to cultivate a more favorable review culture and establish a robust research environment, it is necessary to analyze researchers' perceptions of the IRB review. Therefore, this study aims to assess researchers' overall experiences with the IRB and identify researchers' educational needs and demands for research-related policies. Methods: A semistructured questionnaire with 34 items was developed and refined in consultation with advisors from IRB and Human Research Protection Program (HRPP). The questionnaire was distributed via an online survey to researchers with experience in IRB review. The survey covered general characteristics, satisfaction with the IRB review process (rated on a 10-point scale), experiences with IRB review, HRPP policy demands. Results: The study's descriptive statistics revealed a moderate satisfaction level (average rating, 6.75 out of 10) with the IRB review. Researchers from clinical medicine and other disciplines showed similar satisfaction scores of 6.65 and 6.87, respectively. However, respondents with over 5 years of research experience expressed higher satisfaction (mean score, 7.03) compared to those with less experience (mean score, 6.57). Institutional support was emphasized for improving the IRB review process. Certain training topics generated higher demands for addressing frequently raised IRB issues among minor discipline researchers compared to clinical medicine (p=0.017). Conclusion: We conducted an analysis of researchers' perceptions regarding the IRB as well as their demands concerning educational and HRPP policies. It is imperative to address the pinpointed areas for enhancement and integrate a range of perspectives in order to effectively cultivate a robust research ethics culture and ensure comprehensive participant protection.