인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
This study intended to find out the most substantial items in cold and heat pattern identification(CHPI) questionnaire based on usual symptoms through CHPI diagnosis and evaluation by experts. 120 participants, faculties of OO university, filled out CHPI questionnaire based on usual symptoms by the way of self-reporting. Then 2 Korean Medicine doctors independently diagnosed them whether they belonged to cold pattern identification(PI) or heat PI, and scored the result of it. Pearson correlation of 2 experts was 0.649 in cold PI and 0.605 in heat PI. Agreement was 75.8%(Kappa value 0.516) in cold PI and 74.2%(Kappa value 0.465) in heat PI. Pearson correlation of 2 experts was 0.649 in cold PI and 0.605 in heat PI. Agreement between two experts was 75.8%(Kappa value 0.516) in cold PI and 74.2%(Kappa value 0.465) in heat PI. Items of high correlation with experts’ evaluation followed next: “do not usually like the cold”, “usually like the warm”, “usually feel cold” in cold PI and “do not usually like the hot”, “usually feel hot”, “usually feel burning sensation in the body” in heat PI. We could infer from that facts that experts give weight on ‘subjective feeling of cold or heat in participants body’ and ‘preference on sensation of cold and heat’. We also expect this study to be an epidemiological foundation to disclose correlation between usual CHPI and diseases.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-519-001974871
