• Title/Summary/Keyword: Opt-in procedures

Search Result 4, Processing Time 0.018 seconds

The complexity of opt-in procedures in mobile shopping: Moderating effects of visual attention using the eyetracker (모바일 쇼핑에서 옵트인의 절차적 복잡성 연구: 아이트래커(eyetracker) 기반 시각적 주의의 조절효과)

  • Kim, Sang-Hu;Kim, Yerang;Yang, Byunghwa
    • Journal of Digital Convergence
    • /
    • v.15 no.8
    • /
    • pp.127-135
    • /
    • 2017
  • Consumers tend to feel concern about disclosure of personal information and, at the same time, to avoid inconvenience of procedural complexity caused by the privacy protections. The purpose of current paper is to investigate relationships between opt-in procedural complexity and shopping behavior using smart phones, moderating by the amount of visual attentions using eyetrackers. Therefore, we created a virtual mobile Web-site in which the complexity of opt-in procedures in our experiment is manipulated and measured. Also, we measured the dwell-time of area of interest using SMI-RED 250 instrument for tracking the real eye movement. Results indicated that the levels of procedural complexity are related to repurchase, indicating a moderating effect of the amount of visual attentions. Finally, we discussed several theoretical and practical implications of management for mobile commerce.

Thoracodorsal artery flaps for breast reconstruction-the variants and its approach

  • Thomsen, Jorn Bo;Rindom, Mikkel Borsen;Rancati, Alberto;Angrigiani, Claudio
    • Archives of Plastic Surgery
    • /
    • v.48 no.1
    • /
    • pp.15-25
    • /
    • 2021
  • Thoracodorsal artery (TDA) flaps, ranging from the vascular-pedicled thoracodorsal artery perforator (TDAP) flap, the propeller TDAP flap, and the muscle-sparing latissimus dorsi (MSLD) flap to the conventional latissimus dorsi (LD) flap and the extended LD flap, can all be used for breast reconstruction. The aim of this paper and review is to share our experiences and recommendations for procedure selection when applying TDA-based flaps for breast reconstruction. We describe the different surgical techniques and our thoughts and experience regarding indications and selection between these procedures for individual patients who opt for breast reconstruction. We have performed 574 TDA flaps in 491 patients: 60 extended LD flaps, 122 conventional LD flaps, two MSLD flaps, 233 propeller TDAP flaps, 122 TDAP flaps, and 35 free contralateral TDAP flaps for stacked TDAP breast reconstruction. All the TDA flaps are important flaps for reconstruction of the breast. The LD flap is still an option, although we prefer flaps without muscle when possible. The vascular-pedicled TDAP flap is an option for experienced surgeons, and the propeller TDAP flap can be used in most reconstructive cases of the breast, although a secondary procedure is often necessary for correction of the pedicle bulk. The extended LD flap is an option for women with a substantial body mass index, although it is associated with the highest morbidity of all the TDA flaps. The MSLD flap can be used if the perforators are small or if dissection of the perforators is assessed to be hazardous.

Legal Issues on the Collection and Utilization of Infectious Disease Data in the Infectious Disease Crisis (감염병 위기 상황에서 감염병 데이터의 수집 및 활용에 관한 법적 쟁점 -미국 감염병 데이터 수집 및 활용 절차를 참조 사례로 하여-)

  • Kim, Jae Sun
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.23 no.4
    • /
    • pp.29-74
    • /
    • 2022
  • As social disasters occur under the Disaster Management Act, which can damage the people's "life, body, and property" due to the rapid spread and spread of unexpected COVID-19 infectious diseases in 2020, information collected through inspection and reporting of infectious disease pathogens (Article 11), epidemiological investigation (Article 18), epidemiological investigation for vaccination (Article 29), artificial technology, and prevention policy Decision), (3) It was used as an important basis for decision-making in the context of an infectious disease crisis, such as promoting vaccination and understanding the current status of damage. In addition, medical policy decisions using infectious disease data contribute to quarantine policy decisions, information provision, drug development, and research technology development, and interest in the legal scope and limitations of using infectious disease data has increased worldwide. The use of infectious disease data can be classified for the purpose of spreading and blocking infectious diseases, prevention, management, and treatment of infectious diseases, and the use of information will be more widely made in the context of an infectious disease crisis. In particular, as the serious stage of the Disaster Management Act continues, the processing of personal identification information and sensitive information becomes an important issue. Information on "medical records, vaccination drugs, vaccination, underlying diseases, health rankings, long-term care recognition grades, pregnancy, etc." needs to be interpreted. In the case of "prevention, management, and treatment of infectious diseases", it is difficult to clearly define the concept of medical practicesThe types of actions are judged based on "legislative purposes, academic principles, expertise, and social norms," but the balance of legal interests should be based on the need for data use in quarantine policies and urgent judgment in public health crises. Specifically, the speed and degree of transmission of infectious diseases in a crisis, whether the purpose can be achieved without processing sensitive information, whether it unfairly violates the interests of third parties or information subjects, and the effectiveness of introducing quarantine policies through processing sensitive information can be used as major evaluation factors. On the other hand, the collection, provision, and use of infectious disease data for research purposes will be used through pseudonym processing under the Personal Information Protection Act, consent under the Bioethics Act and deliberation by the Institutional Bioethics Committee, and data provision deliberation committee. Therefore, the use of research purposes is recognized as long as procedural validity is secured as it is reviewed by the pseudonym processing and data review committee, the consent of the information subject, and the institutional bioethics review committee. However, the burden on research managers should be reduced by clarifying the pseudonymization or anonymization procedures, the introduction or consent procedures of the comprehensive consent system and the opt-out system should be clearly prepared, and the procedure for re-identifying or securing security that may arise from technological development should be clearly defined.

Legal Issues in Protecting and Utilitizing Medical Data in United States - Focused on HIPAA/HITECH, 21st Century Cures Act, Common Law, Guidance - (미국의 보건의료데이터 보호 및 활용을 위한 주요 법적 쟁점 -미국 HIPAA/HITECH, 21세기 치료법, 공통규칙, 민간 가이드라인을 중심으로-)

  • Kim, Jae Sun
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.22 no.4
    • /
    • pp.117-157
    • /
    • 2021
  • This research reviewed the HIPAA/HITECH, 21st Century Cures Act, Common Law, and private Guidances from the perspectives in protecting and utilitizing the medical data, while implications were followed. First, the standards for protection and utilization are relatively clearly regulated through single law on personal medical information in the United States. The HIPAA has been introduced in 1996 as fundamental act on protection of medical data. Medical data was divided into personally identifiable information, non-identifying information, and limited dataset under HIPAA. Regulations on de-identification measures for medical information, objects for deletion of limited data sets, and agreement on prohibition of data re-identification were stipulated. Moreover, in the 21st Century Cures Act regulated mutual compatibility for data sharing, prohibition of data blocking, and strengthening of accessibility of data subjects. Common Law introduced comprehensive consent system and clearly stipulates procedures. Second, the regulatory system is relatively simplified and clearly stipulated in the United States. To be specific, the expert consensus and the safe harbor system were introduced as an anonymity measure for identifiable medical information, which clearly defines the process while increasing trust. Third, the protection of the rights of the data subject is specified, the duty of explanation is specified in detail, while the information right of the consumer (opt-out procedure) for identification information is specified. For instance, the HHS rule and FDA regulations recognize the comprehensive consent system for human research, but the consent procedure, method, and requirements are stipulated through the common rule. Fourth, in the case of the United States, a trust-based system is being used throughout the health and medical data legislation. To be specific, Limited Data Sets are allowed to use in condition to the researcher's agreement to prohibit re-identification, and de-identification or consent process is simplified under the system.