• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.9-33
• /
• 2007

In the field of dentistry, there existed relatively few emergency patients or patients who need intensive care and thus had low medical dispute rates. However, these days, there is a general tendency of increased medical disputes. Although many medical disputes are caused by medical accidents of the dentists, because dental assistants are also lawfully involved in practicing dentistry, there is a possibility of medical disputes or medical accidents caused by dental assistants. Therefore, the role of the dental assistants cannot be ignored. This study consists of a survey given to dental hygienists currently working in general hospitals, dental hospitals and private dental clinics. Following is the results of the analysis of 275 respondents' backgrounds, medical disputes rates including patients' complaints, their understanding of medical regulations and their general understanding of overall dental practice and medical disputes. 1. 251 of 274(91.6%) respondents doubted the risk of medical accident and dispute. 2. 81(29.5%) dental hygienist experienced complaint from patients. They have been working in the private dental clinic, the rate of this experience was high. 3. 349 case of 1805(19.3%) the complaints by patients, highest percentage among its category, were those regarding dental fees and poor service. 4. 129 case of 1805(7.1%) patients' complaints, highest percentage among it's subcategory, were those regarding the absence of explanations of precautions or request of agreements before dental treatment. 5. 252 of 267 (94.4%) dental hygienists chart after a scaling treatment. However, only 55(20.7%) dental hygienists chart the fact of explaining the precautions. 6. 6(2.2%) dental hygienists do not inspect patients' medical history, if patients don't mention it. 7. 104 of 274(38.0%) dental hygienists responded to be capable of administering first aid treatment. 8. 115(41.8%) dental hygienists have a first aid kit and equipment. 9. In case of medical dispute, 268(97.8%) dental hygienists respond that, charting plays a big role in resolving the dispute. 10. In case of medical dispute, 272(93.3%) dental hygienists respond that, explanation and agreement before treatment have an important role in settlement of dispute 11. Only 160(58.4%) dental hygienists responded correct answer that the duration of keeping medical records is 10 years. 12. 124(45.3%) respondents thought that it is legal for a dental hygienist to take a panoramic dental X-ray, 71(25.9%) respondents thought that it is legal practice cervical resin treatment by dental hygienist, and 37(13.5%) respondents thought that it is legal extract primary teeth by dental hygienist. 13. 24(18.76%) respondents thought that it doesn't matter to tell patient's state to others 14. 272(99.27%) responded that receiving education for the prevention of medical disputes was needed and of them, 61.0% thought it was urgent. 15. 186(64.2%) has never had classes regarding the prevention of medical disputes while in school and 212(77.4%) has not had the same type of classes after graduating from school. 16. 256(93.4%) responded that there will be even more of an increased number of medical disputes. Among them, 83.3% of respondents though that due to the increased opportunity of acquiring information through the internet and mass media. The study shows that 29.5 percentage of dental hygienists have experienced the medical disputes and complaints and they are lack of recognition of medical regulations and dental hygienist's official duty. So, there is a big potential of the percentage to increase. Therefore, the correct understanding of explaining precautions and requesting agreement before dental treatments and performing them are mandatory. Moreover, classes regarding the prevention and counterplans of medical disputes need to be widely offered.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.169-189
• /
• 2006

In 2007, KSLV(Korea Small Launching Vehicle) that we made at Goheung National Space Center is going to launch and promotes of our space exploration systematically and 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' was enter into force. 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' article 3, section 1, as is prescribing "Korean government keeps the space treaties contracted with other countries and international organizations and pursues after peaceful uses of outer space." The representative international treaties are Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) etc. In Liability convention article 2, "A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft in flight. The important content of the art. 2 is the responsible entity is the 'State' not the 'Company'. According by Korean Space Exploration Act art. 14, person who launches space objects according to art. 8 and art. 11 must bear the liability for damages owing to space accidents of the space objects. Could Korean government apply the Products Liability Act which is enter into force from July 1, 2002 to space launching person? And what is the contact type between Korea Aerospace Research Institute(KARl) and Russia manufacturer. Is that a Co-Development contract or Licence Product contract? And there is no exemption clause to waive the Russia manufacturer's liability which we could find it from other similar contract condition. If there is no exemption clause to the Russia manufacturer, could we apply the Korean Products Liability Act to Russia one? The most important legal point is whether we could apply the Korean Products Liability Act to the main component company. According by the art. 17 of the contract between KARl and the company, KARl already apply the Products Liability Act to the main component company. For reference, we need to examine the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, this case is that long distance electricity communication satellite of Western Union Telegraph company possessions fails on track entry. In Western Union's insurance company supplied to Western Union with insurance of $ 105 millions, which has the satellite regard as entirely damage. Five insurance companies -Appalachian insurance company, Commonwealth insurance company, Industrial Indemnity, Mutual Marine Office, Northbrook Excess & Surplus insurance company- went to court against McDonnell Douglases, Morton Thiokol and Hitco company to inquire for fault and strict liability of product. By the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, KARl should waiver the main component's product liability burden. And we could study the possibility of the adapt 'Government Contractor Defense' theory to the main component company.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.177-193
• /
• 2014

Over the past decade, there has been a rapid diffusion of electronic commerce and a rising number of interconnected networks, resulting in an escalation of security threats and privacy concerns. Electronic commerce has a built-in trade-off between the necessity of providing at least some personal information to consummate an online transaction, and the risk of negative consequences from providing such information. More recently, the frequent disclosure of private information has raised concerns about privacy and its impacts. This has motivated researchers in various fields to explore information privacy issues to address these concerns. Accordingly, the necessity for information privacy policies and technologies for collecting and storing data, and information privacy research in various fields such as medicine, computer science, business, and statistics has increased. The occurrence of various information security accidents have made finding experts in the information security field an important issue. Objective measures for finding such experts are required, as it is currently rather subjective. Based on social network analysis, this paper focused on a framework to evaluate the process of finding experts in the information security field. We collected data from the National Discovery for Science Leaders (NDSL) database, initially collecting about 2000 papers covering the period between 2005 and 2013. Outliers and the data of irrelevant papers were dropped, leaving 784 papers to test the suggested hypotheses. The co-authorship network data for co-author relationship, publisher, affiliation, and so on were analyzed using social network measures including centrality and structural hole. The results of our model estimation are as follows. With the exception of Hypothesis 3, which deals with the relationship between eigenvector centrality and performance, all of our hypotheses were supported. In line with our hypothesis, degree centrality (H1) was supported with its positive influence on the researchers' publishing performance (p<0.001). This finding indicates that as the degree of cooperation increased, the more the publishing performance of researchers increased. In addition, closeness centrality (H2) was also positively associated with researchers' publishing performance (p<0.001), suggesting that, as the efficiency of information acquisition increased, the more the researchers' publishing performance increased. This paper identified the difference in publishing performance among researchers. The analysis can be used to identify core experts and evaluate their performance in the information privacy research field. The co-authorship network for information privacy can aid in understanding the deep relationships among researchers. In addition, extracting characteristics of publishers and affiliations, this paper suggested an understanding of the social network measures and their potential for finding experts in the information privacy field. Social concerns about securing the objectivity of experts have increased, because experts in the information privacy field frequently participate in political consultation, and business education support and evaluation. In terms of practical implications, this research suggests an objective framework for experts in the information privacy field, and is useful for people who are in charge of managing research human resources. This study has some limitations, providing opportunities and suggestions for future research. Presenting the difference in information diffusion according to media and proximity presents difficulties for the generalization of the theory due to the small sample size. Therefore, further studies could consider an increased sample size and media diversity, the difference in information diffusion according to the media type, and information proximity could be explored in more detail. Moreover, previous network research has commonly observed a causal relationship between the independent and dependent variable (Kadushin, 2012). In this study, degree centrality as an independent variable might have causal relationship with performance as a dependent variable. However, in the case of network analysis research, network indices could be computed after the network relationship is created. An annual analysis could help mitigate this limitation.