http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
소음 특수건강진단 1차검사의 민감도와 특이도에 미치는 일과성 역치 상승과 주변환경 소음의 영향
원종욱,방문규,송중호,정선아,송재석,노재훈 대한산업의학회 2000 대한직업환경의학회지 Vol.12 No.2
Object : This study was performed to increase the sensitivity and specificity for screening the examinee of second hearing test. Methods : Study subjects were 219 workers who exposed more than average 80dB. They were taken the hearing test two times, before noose exposure and at 1 hour to 4 hours after worksite noise exposure. To investigate the ambient noise workers who were taken the hearing test in the test room which ambient noise was less than 45dB were classified Group I and the others were classified Group II . To calculate the sensitivity and specificity we made it gold standard whether worker had noise induced hearing loss. Results : Difference of hearing loss between before and after noise exposure for left and right ear was 11.4 dB and 11.7 dB respectively at 500 Hz, 8.7 dB and 9.6 dB at 1,000 Hz, 6.3 dB and 6.9 dB at 2,000 Hz and 6.9 dB and 7.4 dB at 4,000 Hz In Group I. That for left ear and right ear was 5.8 dB and 4.9 dB at 500 Hz respectively, 5.4 dB and 6.4 dB at 1,000 Hz, 6.3 dB and 5.3 dB at 2,000 Hz, and 5.5 dB and 5.8 dB at 4,000 Hz in Group II. The sensitivity was 100 in both Groups and the specificity was increased to 58.3 and 71.8 in Group I and Group II respectively until 10 dB was deducted from hearing level at 1,000 Hz and 4,000 Hz. Conclusion : When the screening hearing test was performed at worksite, we might deduct 10 dB from measured hearing level to increase the specificity without reduction of sensitivity.
공동성(Kong Dongsung),방문규(Bang Moonkyu),윤기웅(Yoon Kiwoong) 한국정책분석평가학회 2007 政策分析評價學會報 Vol.17 No.4
This paper investigates what determines the program performance ratings in the 2006 scheme of the so-called Program Assessment Rating Tool-Korea (K-PART). The factors are largely grouped into two: assessed and unassessed. The assessed factors are those that are officially listed in the rating scheme, such as assessing components, question weighting, question linkages, etc. The unassessed factors are those that are not listed in the rating scheme but influence the rating results in one way or another, such as the types of programs, the programs budget size, the politics of program authorization & appropriation, etc. This paper finds that among the assessed factors the program results/accountability and the strategic planning components are the most crucial factors of the rating results. The unassessed factors, particularly the programs budget size and the types of programs, are correlated with the program ratings, but the degree of influence is minimal.