• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.20 no.2 s.22
• /
• pp.331-340
• /
• 1987

To determine the incidence rate of school accidents and its associated factors, a cohort observation was carried out in a boys' high school of a total of 2,324 students for an academic year from March 1986 to February 1987. Data for accidents were collected by the author (school nurse) as students came to the school health station for treatment of accidental injury. Data for school activities were obtained from the diary of academic affairs. A total of 603 students made 1,126 visits to the station for accidental injury during the study period that gave an average 1.9 accidents per student. The average number of visits for accidental injury per day was 5.1 and the incidence rate of accidental injury was 2.2 per 1,000 student days. Each class had about 30 accidents on the average in a year. However there were two classes that had exceptionally high incidence rate of accidents; 54 accidents in one class where 10 athletes were assigned and 58 accidents in the other class where the teacher in charge was On vacation for two months. The highest incidence rate of accident was observed in June (3.4 per 1,000 student days) and the lowest rates were in December and February (1.5 and 0.7 per 1,000 student days, respectively) and there were no appreciable difference by day of week. Accidents were caused by mischief or carelessness of students in 62.2% and by the inappropriate tools and facilities of school in 18.6% . The accidents caused by tools and facilities were mainly due to the antiquated chairs and tables. Referral rate to hospital for severe injury was three times higher in cloudy days and five times higher in rainy days than in clear days. There was almost no accident during the examination period but increased after the examination. Based on these findings, following measures are recommended to prevent school accident: disperse the athletes throughout the classes: should the teacher in charge leave the class for a long period, replace with another teacher who is familiar with the class to keep order; replace or repair the inappropriate tools and facilities; and warn the students for the risk of accident or broadcast music or let the students have light physical exercise to relieve the tension in cloudy or rainy day and after examination.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.135-179
• /
• 2018

How do robots interact with the elderly? In this paper, we analyze the contexts of interaction between robots and the elderly and the role of mediators in initiating, facilitating, and maintaining the interaction. We do not attempt to evaluate the robot's performance or measure the impact of robots on the elderly. Instead, we focus on the circumstances and contexts within which a robot is situated as it interacts with the elderly. Our premise is that the success of human-robot interaction does not depend solely on the robot's technical capability, but also on the pre-arranged settings and local contingencies at the site of interaction. We select three television shows that feature robots for the elderly and one "dementia-prevention" robot in a regional healthcare center as our sites for observing robot-elderly interaction: "Grandma's Robot"(tvN), "Co-existence Experiment''(JTBC), "Future Diary"(MBC), and the Silbot class in Suwon. By analyzing verbal and non-verbal interactions between the elderly and the robots in these programs, we point out that in most cases the robots and the elderly do not meet one-to-one; the interaction is usually mediated by an actor who is not an old person. These mediators are not temporary or secondary components in the robot-elderly interaction; they play a key role in the relationship by arranging the first meeting, triggering initial interactions, and carefully observing unfolding interactions. At critical moments, the mediators prevent the interaction from falling apart by intervening verbally or physically. Based on our observation of the robot-elderly interaction, we argue that we can better understand and evaluate the human-robot interaction in general by paying attention to the existence and role of the mediators. We suggest that researchers in human-robot interaction should expand their analytical focus from one-to-one interactions between humans and robots to human-robot-human interactions in diverse real-world situations.