• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.19-37
• /
• 2008

The youth unemployment issue has not shown any improvement in years. The purpose of this study was to observe how employment issues affecting university students influence their life aims, self-efficacy, view of reality, view of the future, and life satisfaction. 239 students from three universities located in Seoul and Gyeonggi province were assessed through the instrument FLL and questions about employment issues, their life aims, life satisfaction and also their employment perspective. A total of 34 items of the FLL were divided through factor analysis into six higher life aims, self-love, family love and interpersonal aims, personal-financial aims, social-public aims, moral aims and political and ideological aims. Using Cluster analysis, three group profiles were found depending on the employment perspective such as a better view of reality, better self-efficacy, and better life satisfaction. A t-test was conducted in order to compare the two groups classified according to favorable or unfavorable employment perspectives. No significant differences existed between the groups in the perception of youth unemployment or in social-demographic factors, such as gender, age, and academic year. However, in life aims, the unfavorable group showed significantly higher interest in the domains of family love and interpersonal aims, personal -financial aims, and social-public aims than the favorable perspective group. Conversely, this group showed a significantly greater negative view of reality in most life domains, as it evaluated that its aims are more poorly achieved than the comparable group. Also, the unfavorable perspective group showed a lesser degree of self-efficacy in most life domains and the same in the category of life satisfaction, i.e., lesser satisfaction in all life domains except for family love, and moral aims. However, no significant difference existed between the groups in the view of the future. The results were discussed in relation to other social-cognitive factors for life satisfaction found in preceding studies.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.82 no.6
• /
• pp.1505-1523
• /
• 2021

Purpose Although chest CT has been discussed as a first-line test for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), little research has explored the implications of CT exposure in the population. To review chest CT protocols and radiation doses in COVID-19 publications and explore the number needed to diagnose (NND) and the number needed to predict (NNP) if CT is used as a first-line test. Materials and Methods We searched nine highly cited radiology journals to identify studies discussing the CT-based diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. Study-level information on the CT protocol and radiation dose was collected, and the doses were compared with each national diagnostic reference level (DRL). The NND and NNP, which depends on the test positive rate (TPR), were calculated, given a CT sensitivity of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91%-96%) and specificity of 37% (95% CI: 26%-50%), and applied to the early outbreak in Wuhan, New York, and Italy. Results From 86 studies, the CT protocol and radiation dose were reported in 81 (94.2%) and 17 studies (19.8%), respectively. Low-dose chest CT was used more than twice as often as standard-dose chest CT (39.5% vs.18.6%), while the remaining studies (44.2%) did not provide relevant information. The radiation doses were lower than the national DRLs in 15 of the 17 studies (88.2%) that reported doses. The NND was 3.2 scans (95% CI: 2.2-6.0). The NNPs at TPRs of 50%, 25%, 10%, and 5% were 2.2, 3.6, 8.0, 15.5 scans, respectively. In Wuhan, 35418 (TPR, 58%; 95% CI: 27710-56755) to 44840 (TPR, 38%; 95% CI: 35161-68164) individuals were estimated to have undergone CT examinations to diagnose 17365 patients. During the early surge in New York and Italy, daily NNDs changed up to 5.4 and 10.9 times, respectively, within 10 weeks. Conclusion Low-dose CT protocols were described in less than half of COVID-19 publications, and radiation doses were frequently lacking. The number of populations involved in a first-line diagnostic CT test could vary dynamically according to daily TPR; therefore, caution is required in future planning.