WO2011118866A1 - Method for evaluation request using network - Google Patents
Method for evaluation request using network Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2011118866A1 WO2011118866A1 PCT/KR2010/001882 KR2010001882W WO2011118866A1 WO 2011118866 A1 WO2011118866 A1 WO 2011118866A1 KR 2010001882 W KR2010001882 W KR 2010001882W WO 2011118866 A1 WO2011118866 A1 WO 2011118866A1
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- server
- reviewers
- audit
- Prior art date
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
Definitions
- the present invention relates to a method for requesting an audit using a network.
- a clinical trial is a test on the safety and efficacy of a drug or product used in humans. Before conducting a clinical trial directly related to humans, the clinical trial review board (IRB) must review it. It is legalized to go through.
- IRS clinical trial review board
- the review conducted by the Institutional Review Board is conducted by a number of reviewers.
- reviewers are conducted by a plurality of independent institutions because a plurality of reviewers are rarely gathered in a single institution.
- communication between reviewers is not easy during the deliberation process.
- the screening process may cause an error depending on the screening task in the screening task in the Institutional Review Board, but when the content reviewed by one institution is reviewed by another institution In some cases, the contents of examinations at each organization may conflict with each other. For this reason, communication at each institution where deliberations take place is an important factor.
- the examination period may be performed for a long time, and as described above, there may be a problem that duplication or conflict of the examination contents occurs.
- the present invention has been made to solve the above-mentioned problems, and even if the audit is conducted by a plurality of independent auditors to provide an audit request method through a network that can facilitate communication at each audit institution. have.
- an audit request method through a network includes: an audit task registration step in which an audit task to be audited by an institution that participated in the audit is registered on a server; An email transmission step of transmitting, at the server, an email (e-mail) requesting at least one auditor for performing the audit on the audit task that the audit task is registered in the server; A notification message transmission step of transmitting, by the server, a notification message informing that the email has been transmitted to the mobile communication terminal of the at least one examiner; Characterized in that it comprises a.
- the one or more examiners are a plurality, and the email transmission step is characterized in that for transmitting the email to the plurality of examiners sequentially one by one.
- the one or more examiners are plural, and the sending of the email is characterized in that the emails of the plurality of examiners are bundled by domains and the emails are sequentially transmitted for each domain.
- the e-mail confirmation determination step of the server determines whether the at least one reviewer has confirmed the e-mail for the e-mail sent to the at least one reviewer in the e-mail transmission step;
- the notification message transmitting step may further include transmitting the notification message to any one of the at least one examiner when it is determined that one of the at least one examiner has not checked the email for a predetermined period of time.
- the notification message is characterized in that the transmission.
- the examiner can be notified to the examiner about the registered examination task, and the examiner can be surely and accurately informed.
- the number of e-mails that are sent simultaneously can be controlled by sending one by one or grouping the domains of the reviewer e-mails, which can be treated as spam mails that can occur as many e-mails are sent to multiple reviewers at the same time. There is an effect that can be prevented from processing.
- 1 is a flow chart showing the flow of the audit request method through the network of the present invention.
- the examination task to be reviewed for the clinical trial is applied by the researcher who wants to conduct the clinical trial or by the supporter who supports it.In this stage, the research project and the sponsor's institution are reviewed on the server operated by the clinical trial committee.
- the application is made by uploading documents such as an application form.
- the clinical trial review committee checks whether the application has been completed including all necessary matters about the screening task in which the application was made, and a normal application was made. Review tasks are registered with the Institutional Review Board.
- step S102 the audit task is requested to a plurality of auditors who can audit the registered audit task, such as safety, effectiveness, and whether it is suitable for use or use. Send an email to request a number of reviewers to review the project.
- the reviewer requests the reviewer and sends an email to a number of reviewers to inform the reviewer that they have been registered with the Institutional Review Board. Is sent as a single server, misleading as spam. As a result, some of the reviewers may be treated as spam e-mail sent from the server, not knowing whether the request was submitted to the review task.
- each reviewer can prevent important emails from being treated as spam by specially managing the emails received.
- the server sends emails to multiple reviewers in order to prevent spam from being sent from the server. It is possible to prevent.
- step S103 when an email is sent to the plurality of reviewers, a notification message indicating that the email has been sent is transmitted to the plurality of reviewers.
- a review task for the clinical trial is registered in the server of the clinical trial review committee, and the review is performed. It is possible to inform multiple reviewers that an e-mail has been sent stating that a must be done.
- the examiner can know that the e-mail has been received from the server of the clinical trial examination committee by sending a notification message about it.
- the server judges whether or not the plurality of reviewers has confirmed the email sent in step S103, and the image included in the email has been read by sending an email including a small image in an email sent to the plurality of reviewers. It is possible to determine whether a number of reviewers have checked each e-mail, for example, using a method of checking whether the e-mail is determined.
- step S114 it is determined whether a plurality of examiners who have received e-mails have checked the e-mails, and if there are reviewers who do not check e-mails after a certain period of time has elapsed, a notification message is transmitted to the examiner's mobile communication terminal.
- the review task was registered to 100 reviewers, and a notification email was sent to the reviewer regarding the registered review task, and 70 reviewers checked the email sent in step S114 for a period of two days. If judges have not yet verified the email, this step sends a notification message to 30 reviewers who have not verified the email, and has not yet confirmed the email by sending a notification message that has sent the email and prompts the user to confirm the email. It is possible to encourage reviewers who do not have access to the emails sent.
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Information Transfer Between Computers (AREA)
Abstract
The present invention relates to a method for requesting an evaluation using a network, which comprises the following steps: registrating a task for an evaluation on a server; transmitting e-mail for requesting the evaluation of the task from one or more evaluators; transmitting a notification message, which notifies the transmission of the e-mail, to a mobile communication terminal; and notifying the evaluator of the registered task for evaluation, wherein the request for evaluation is effectively delivered to the evaluator more reliably and accurately.
Description
본 발명은 네트워크를 이용하여 심사를 요청하는 방법에 관한 것이다.The present invention relates to a method for requesting an audit using a network.
임상시험이란 사람에게 사용되는 의약품이나 제품 등의 안전성과 유효성에 대해 시험하는 것으로, 이렇게 사람과 직접적으로 관련된 임상시험을 실시하기 위해서는 그 전에 반드시 임상시험심사위원회(IRB: Institutional Review Board)에서 심사를 거치도록 법제화가 되어 있다.A clinical trial is a test on the safety and efficacy of a drug or product used in humans. Before conducting a clinical trial directly related to humans, the clinical trial review board (IRB) must review it. It is legalized to go through.
임상시험심사위원회에서 이루어지는 심사는 다수의 심사자에 의해 심의가 이루어지는데, 다수의 심사자가 하나의 기관에 모여 있는 경우가 거의 없기 때문에 다수의 독립적인 기관에서 각각 심의가 이루어지는 경우가 대부분이다. 그렇기 때문에 심의 과정 중에 각 심사자 간의 의사소통이 쉽지 않다.The review conducted by the Institutional Review Board is conducted by a number of reviewers. In many cases, reviewers are conducted by a plurality of independent institutions because a plurality of reviewers are rarely gathered in a single institution. As a result, communication between reviewers is not easy during the deliberation process.
더군다나, 심의가 이루어지는 동안에 수정이 이루어지기도 하고 심의를 받는 심사과제에 대해서 보완이 이루어지기도 하는데, 이런 경우에 다사 임상시험의 심사를 받고자 심사과제를 신청한 기관에서 수정이나 보완된 이후에 다시 다수의 심사자에게 각각 심의가 이루어지는 과정을 거치게 된다.In addition, modifications may be made during the deliberations, or supplements may be made on the subjects under review, in which case a number of changes may be made after the amendment or supplementation has been made by the institution applying for the review of the multiple clinical trials. Each reviewer undergoes a deliberation process.
여기서, 임상시험을 위해 임상시험에 대한 심사과제를 임상시험심사위원회에 심사를 신청하는 이는 임상시험을 하고자 하는 연구자나 이를 지원하는 후원자인 경우가 대부분이고, 연구자나 후원자는 필요한 서류를 구비하여 임상시험심사위원회에 제출한다. 그리고 임상시험심사위원회는 제출된 서류를 이용하여 심사과제에 대해 윤리성과 과학적인 측면을 심사하여 심의를 한 이후에 심의 내용을 신청한 이에게 전달을 하는 과정을 거친다.Here, most of the applicants who apply for examination to the Clinical Trial Examination Committee for the clinical trial for the clinical trial are the researcher who wants to conduct the clinical trial or the sponsor who supports it, and the researcher or the sponsor supports the clinical Submit to the examination review committee. In addition, the Institutional Review Board reviews the ethical and scientific aspects of the review task using the submitted documents, reviews them, and delivers them to the applicant.
상기와 같이, 심의가 이루어지는 과정을 살펴보면, 임상시험심사위원회에서 심사과제에 대해서 심사 과정은 심사과제에 따라서 오차가 발생할 수는 있으나, 대체로 하나의 기관에서 심사된 내용이 다시 다른 기관에서 심사되는 경우도 있고, 경우에 따라서는 각 기관에서의 심사 내용이 서로 상충되는 경우도 발생한다. 그렇기 때문에 심의가 이루어지는 각 기관에서의 의사소통이 중요한 요인이 된다.As described above, when reviewing the screening process, the screening process may cause an error depending on the screening task in the screening task in the Institutional Review Board, but when the content reviewed by one institution is reviewed by another institution In some cases, the contents of examinations at each organization may conflict with each other. For this reason, communication at each institution where deliberations take place is an important factor.
그렇지만, 종래에는 심사과제에 대한 심의가 오프라인 상에서 이루어짐에 따라서 심사기간이 오랜 시일동안 이루어지기도 하고, 상기에서와 같이, 심사 내용의 중복이나 상충이 발생하기도 한다는 문제가 있다.However, in the related art, as the deliberation on the examination task is performed off-line, the examination period may be performed for a long time, and as described above, there may be a problem that duplication or conflict of the examination contents occurs.
본 발명은 상술한 문제점을 해결하기 위한 것으로, 독립적인 다수의 심사기관에 의해 심사가 이루어지더라도 각 심사기관에서의 의사소통이 원활하게 이루어질 수 있는 네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법을 제공하는데 그 목적이 있다.The present invention has been made to solve the above-mentioned problems, and even if the audit is conducted by a plurality of independent auditors to provide an audit request method through a network that can facilitate communication at each audit institution. have.
이러한 목적을 달성하기 위하여 본 고안의 일 태양으로 네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법은 심사에 참여한 기관에 의해 심사를 받고자하는 심사과제가 서버에 등록되는 심사과제 등록단계; 상기 심사과제가 상기 서버에 등록되었음을 상기 심사과제에 대해 심사를 수행하는 하나 이상의 심사자에게 요청하는 이메일(e-mail)을 상기 서버에서 전송하는 이메일 전송단계; 상기 이메일 전송단계에서 이메일이 전송되었음을 알리는 알림 메시지가 상기 서버에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자의 이동통신 단말기로 전송되는 알림 메시지 전송단계; 를 포함하는 것을 특징으로 한다.In one aspect of the present invention, an audit request method through a network includes: an audit task registration step in which an audit task to be audited by an institution that participated in the audit is registered on a server; An email transmission step of transmitting, at the server, an email (e-mail) requesting at least one auditor for performing the audit on the audit task that the audit task is registered in the server; A notification message transmission step of transmitting, by the server, a notification message informing that the email has been transmitted to the mobile communication terminal of the at least one examiner; Characterized in that it comprises a.
이때, 상기 하나 이상의 심사자는 다수이고, 상기 이메일 전송단계는 상기 다수의 심사자에게 전송하는 이메일을 순차적으로 하나씩 전송하는 것을 특징으로 한다.At this time, the one or more examiners are a plurality, and the email transmission step is characterized in that for transmitting the email to the plurality of examiners sequentially one by one.
그리고 상기 하나 이상의 심사자는 다수이고, 상기 이메일 전송단계는 상기 다수의 심사자의 이메일을 도메인(Domain)별로 묶어 상기 도메인별로 이메일을 순차적으로 전송하는 것을 특징으로 한다.In addition, the one or more examiners are plural, and the sending of the email is characterized in that the emails of the plurality of examiners are bundled by domains and the emails are sequentially transmitted for each domain.
또한, 상기 이메일 전송단계에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자에게 전송된 이메일에 대하여 상기 하나 이상의 심사자가 상기 이메일을 확인하였는지를 상기 서버에서 판단하는 이메일 확인 판단단계; 를 더 포함하고, 상기 알림 메시지 전송단계는 상기 이메일 확인 판단단계에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자 중 어느 하나가 상기 이메일을 일정기간 동안 확인하지 않았다고 판단되는 경우에 상기 하나 이상의 심사자 중 어느 하나의 이동통신 단말기로 알림 메시지가 전송되는 것을 특징으로 한다.In addition, the e-mail confirmation determination step of the server determines whether the at least one reviewer has confirmed the e-mail for the e-mail sent to the at least one reviewer in the e-mail transmission step; The notification message transmitting step may further include transmitting the notification message to any one of the at least one examiner when it is determined that one of the at least one examiner has not checked the email for a predetermined period of time. The notification message is characterized in that the transmission.
이상에서 설명한 바와 같이 본 발명에 의하면, 등록된 심사과제에 대하여 심사자에게 이를 알려 심사 청구를 요청함에 있어서 더욱 확실하고 정확하게 심사자에게 알릴 수 있다는 효과가 있다.As described above, according to the present invention, there is an effect that the examiner can be notified to the examiner about the registered examination task, and the examiner can be surely and accurately informed.
그리고 다수의 심사자들에게 전송되는 이메일이 동시에 많은 사람들에게 전달됨에 따라서 발생할 수 있는 스팸메일로 처리될 수 있는 것을 하나씩 전송하거나 심사자 이메일의 도메인별로 묶어 전송함으로써, 동시에 전송되는 이메일의 수가 조절되어 스팸메일로 처리되는 것을 방지할 수 있다는 효과가 있다.In addition, the number of e-mails that are sent simultaneously can be controlled by sending one by one or grouping the domains of the reviewer e-mails, which can be treated as spam mails that can occur as many e-mails are sent to multiple reviewers at the same time. There is an effect that can be prevented from processing.
도1은 본 발명의 네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법의 흐름을 도시한 흐름도이다.1 is a flow chart showing the flow of the audit request method through the network of the present invention.
본 발명의 바람직한 실시예에 대하여 첨부된 도면을 참조하여 더 구체적으로 설명하되, 이미 주지되어진 기술적 부분에 대해서는 설명의 간결함을 위해 생략하거나 압축하기로 한다.DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in more detail with reference to the accompanying drawings, and the well-known technical parts will be omitted or compressed for brevity of description.
본 발명의 네트워크를 통해 심사요청 방법에 대해서 도2에 도시된 흐름도를 따라 설명하되, 편의상 순서를 붙여 설명한다.The examination request method through the network of the present invention will be described according to the flowchart shown in FIG.
1. 심사과제 신청<S101>1. Examination task application <S101>
임상시험을 위해 심사를 받고자 하는 심사과제가 임상시험을 하고자 하는 연구자나 이를 지원하는 후원자 등에 의해 신청되는 단계로, 본 단계에서는 연구자나 후원자의 기관에서 임상시험심사위원회에서 운영하는 서버에 심사과제 및 신청서 등의 서류를 업로드함으로써, 신청이 이루어진다.The examination task to be reviewed for the clinical trial is applied by the researcher who wants to conduct the clinical trial or by the supporter who supports it.In this stage, the research project and the sponsor's institution are reviewed on the server operated by the clinical trial committee. The application is made by uploading documents such as an application form.
2. 심사과제 등록<S102>2. Registration of examination task <S102>
단계 S101에서 연구자나 후원자의 기관에 의해 심사과제가 신청이 되면, 임상시험심사위원회에서는 신청이 이루어진 심사과제에 대해 필요한 사항이 모두 포함되어 신청이 이루어졌는지 등에 대한 확인이 이루어지고, 정상적인 신청이 이루어진 심사과제는 임상시험심사위원회에 등록된다.When the screening task is submitted by the researcher or sponsor's institution in step S101, the clinical trial review committee checks whether the application has been completed including all necessary matters about the screening task in which the application was made, and a normal application was made. Review tasks are registered with the Institutional Review Board.
3. 심사과제 심사요청<S103>3. Request for review of the audit project <S103>
단계 S102에서 심사과제가 정상적으로 등록되면, 등록된 심사과제에 대하여 안전성, 유효성 및 사람에 대하여 이용이나 사용이 적합한지 등의 심사를 할 수 있는 다수의 심사자에게 심사를 요청하는 단계로, 본 단계에서는 심사과제의 심사를 다수의 심사자에게 요청하기 위해 이메일(e-mail)을 전송한다.If the audit task is normally registered in step S102, the audit task is requested to a plurality of auditors who can audit the registered audit task, such as safety, effectiveness, and whether it is suitable for use or use. Send an email to request a number of reviewers to review the project.
이때, 본 단계에서는 심사자에게 심사를 요청하고, 심사과제가 임상시험심사위원회에 등록되었음을 알리기 위해 다수의 심사자에게 이메일을 전송하는데, 다수의 심사자를 대상으로 동시에 이메일을 발송하게 되면, 경우에 따라 다량의 이메일이 하나의 서버로부터 발송됨에 따라 스팸메일로 오인되는 경우가 발생한다. 그에 따라 심사자들 중에는 서버에서 전송된 이메일이 스팸메일로 처리가 되어, 자신에게 심사과제에 대하여 심사 요청이 있었는지를 알지 못하는 경우가 발생할 수 있다.At this stage, the reviewer requests the reviewer and sends an email to a number of reviewers to inform the reviewer that they have been registered with the Institutional Review Board. Is sent as a single server, misleading as spam. As a result, some of the reviewers may be treated as spam e-mail sent from the server, not knowing whether the request was submitted to the review task.
물론, 각 심사자들이 수신되는 이메일들 중에서 중요한 이메일을 특별히 관리하여 스팸메일로 처리되는 것을 방지할 수도 있으나, 이는 임상시험심사위원회에서 강제할 수 없어 그에 따른 불편을 초래할 수 있다.Of course, each reviewer can prevent important emails from being treated as spam by specially managing the emails received.
그러므로 이를 해결하기 위하여 서버에서는 서버에서 발송되는 이메일이 스팸처리가 되는 것을 방지하기 위하여, 다수의 심사자들에게 이메일을 발송할 때, 각각 순차적으로 하나씩 이메일을 전송함으로써, 해당 이메일이 스팸메일로 오인되는 것을 방지하는 것이 가능하다.Therefore, in order to solve this problem, the server sends emails to multiple reviewers in order to prevent spam from being sent from the server. It is possible to prevent.
또는, 심사자들이 다수인만큼 각 심사자들의 이메일에 대한 도메인(Domain)이 다양하기 때문에, 도메인별로 묶어 그룹화하여 이메일을 발송함으로써, 해당 이메일이 스팸메일로 오인되는 것을 방지하는 것도 가능하다.Alternatively, since there are many domains for each of the reviewers' emails because there are many reviewers, it is possible to prevent the emails from being mistaken as spam mails by grouping the domains and sending the emails.
4. 알림 메시지 전송<S105>4. Send notification message <S105>
단계 S103에서 다수의 심사자에게 이메일이 발송되면 이메일이 발송되었음을 알리는 알림 메시지를 다수의 심사자에게 전송하는 단계로, 이를 통해 임상시험을 위한 심사과제가 임상시험심사위원회의 서버에 등록되었으며, 이에 대한 심사가 이루어져야 한다는 내용의 이메일이 전송되었음을 다수의 심사자에게 알리는 것이 가능하다.In step S103, when an email is sent to the plurality of reviewers, a notification message indicating that the email has been sent is transmitted to the plurality of reviewers. Through this, a review task for the clinical trial is registered in the server of the clinical trial review committee, and the review is performed. It is possible to inform multiple reviewers that an e-mail has been sent stating that a must be done.
즉, 심사자가 즉시 이메일을 자신에게 전송되었음을 알지 못하더라도, 이동통신 단말기에 그에 대한 알림 메시지가 전송됨으로써, 임상시험심사위원회의 서버에서 메일이 수신되었음을 심사자가 알 수 있다.That is, even if the examiner does not know that the e-mail is immediately sent to him, the examiner can know that the e-mail has been received from the server of the clinical trial examination committee by sending a notification message about it.
5. 이메일 확인 판단<S114>5. Confirm email confirmation <S114>
본 단계는 단계 S103에서 전송된 이메일을 다수의 심사자들이 확인하였는지를 서버에서 판단하는 단계로, 다수의 심사자들에게 전송되는 이메일에 작은 이미지 등을 포함하여 이메일을 전송함으로써, 이메일에 포함된 이미지가 읽혔는지를 확인하는 방법 등을 이용하여 다수의 심사자들이 각각 이메일을 확인하였는지를 판단하는 것이 가능하다.In this step, the server judges whether or not the plurality of reviewers has confirmed the email sent in step S103, and the image included in the email has been read by sending an email including a small image in an email sent to the plurality of reviewers. It is possible to determine whether a number of reviewers have checked each e-mail, for example, using a method of checking whether the e-mail is determined.
즉, 본 단계에서는 이메일을 전송받은 심사자가 이메일을 확인하면, 어떤 심사자가 이메일을 확인하였는지를 확인하는 것이 가능하고, 더불어 언제 이메일을 확인하였는지도 확인하는 것이 가능하다.That is, in this step, if the reviewer who received the email checks the email, it is possible to confirm which reviewer has checked the email, and also when the email is checked.
6. 알림 메시지 전송<S115>
6. Send notification message <S115>
단계 S114에서 이메일을 전송받은 다수의 심사자가 이메일을 확인하였는지를 판단하여, 일정기간이 경과된 이후에도 이메일을 확인하지 않는 심사자가 있는 경우에는 해당 심사자의 이동통신 단말기로 알림 메시지를 전송한다.In step S114, it is determined whether a plurality of examiners who have received e-mails have checked the e-mails, and if there are reviewers who do not check e-mails after a certain period of time has elapsed, a notification message is transmitted to the examiner's mobile communication terminal.
즉, 100명의 심사자에게 심사과제가 등록되었으며, 등록된 심사과제에 대하여 심사가 이루어져야 함에 대한 안내 이메일을 전송하였는데, 이틀의 기간 동안 단계 S114에서 전송된 이메일을 확인한 심사자가 70명이고, 나머지 30명의 심사자들은 아직 이메일을 확인하지 않은 것으로 판단되면, 본 단계에서는 이메일을 확인하지 않은 30명의 심사자에게 알림 메시지를 전송함으로써, 이메일이 전송되었고 이메일의 확인을 촉구하는 알림 메시지를 전송함으로써, 아직 이메일을 확인하지 않은 심사자들로 하여금, 전송된 이메일을 확인할 수 있도록 유도하는 것이 가능하다.In other words, the review task was registered to 100 reviewers, and a notification email was sent to the reviewer regarding the registered review task, and 70 reviewers checked the email sent in step S114 for a period of two days. If judges have not yet verified the email, this step sends a notification message to 30 reviewers who have not verified the email, and has not yet confirmed the email by sending a notification message that has sent the email and prompts the user to confirm the email. It is possible to encourage reviewers who do not have access to the emails sent.
위에서 설명한 바와 같이 본 발명에 대한 구체적인 설명은 첨부된 도면을 참조한 실시예에 의해서 이루어졌지만, 상술한 실시예는 본 발명의 바람직한 예를 들어 설명하였을 뿐이기 때문에, 본 발명이 상기의 실시예에만 국한되는 것으로 이해되어져서는 아니 되며, 본 발명의 권리범위는 후술하는 청구범위 및 그 등가개념으로 이해되어져야 할 것이다.As described above, the detailed description of the present invention has been made by the embodiments with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, since the above-described embodiments have only been described with reference to preferred examples of the present invention, the present invention is limited to the above embodiments. It should not be understood that the scope of the present invention is to be understood by the claims and equivalent concepts described below.
Claims (4)
- 심사에 참여한 기관에 의해 심사를 받고자하는 심사과제가 서버에 등록되는 심사과제 등록단계;An audit task registration step in which an audit task to be audited by an institution participating in the audit is registered in a server;상기 심사과제가 상기 서버에 등록되었음을 상기 심사과제에 대해 심사를 수행하는 하나 이상의 심사자에게 요청하는 이메일(e-mail)을 상기 서버에서 전송하는 이메일 전송단계;An email transmission step of transmitting, at the server, an email (e-mail) requesting at least one auditor for performing the audit on the audit task that the audit task is registered in the server;상기 이메일 전송단계에서 이메일이 전송되었음을 알리는 알림 메시지가 상기 서버에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자의 이동통신 단말기로 전송되는 알림 메시지 전송단계; 를 포함하는 것을 특징으로 하는A notification message transmission step of transmitting, by the server, a notification message informing that the email has been transmitted to the mobile communication terminal of the at least one examiner; Characterized in that it comprises네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법.How to request a review over the network.
- 제1항에 있어서,The method of claim 1,상기 하나 이상의 심사자는 다수이고,Said one or more reviewers are multiple,상기 이메일 전송단계는 상기 다수의 심사자에게 전송하는 이메일을 순차적으로 하나씩 전송하는 것을 특징으로 하는The email transmission step is characterized in that for transmitting the email to the plurality of examiners sequentially one by one네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법.How to request a review over the network.
- 제1항에 있어서,The method of claim 1,상기 하나 이상의 심사자는 다수이고,Said one or more reviewers are multiple,상기 이메일 전송단계는 상기 다수의 심사자의 이메일을 도메인(Domain)별로 묶어 상기 도메인별로 이메일을 순차적으로 전송하는 것을 특징으로 하는In the email transmission step, the emails of the plurality of reviewers are bundled by domains, and the emails are sequentially transmitted for each domain.네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법.How to request a review over the network.
- 제1항에 있어서,The method of claim 1,상기 이메일 전송단계에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자에게 전송된 이메일에 대하여 상기 하나 이상의 심사자가 상기 이메일을 확인하였는지를 상기 서버에서 판단하는 이메일 확인 판단단계; 를 더 포함하고,An e-mail confirmation determination step of determining, by the server, whether the at least one reviewer has confirmed the e-mail with respect to an e-mail transmitted to the at least one reviewer in the e-mail transmission step; More,상기 알림 메시지 전송단계는 상기 이메일 확인 판단단계에서 상기 하나 이상의 심사자 중 어느 하나가 상기 이메일을 일정기간 동안 확인하지 않았다고 판단되는 경우에 상기 하나 이상의 심사자 중 어느 하나의 이동통신 단말기로 알림 메시지가 전송되는 것을 특징으로 하는In the notification message transmitting step, when it is determined that one of the one or more examiners has not checked the email for a predetermined period of time, the notification message is transmitted to any one of the one or more mobile communication terminals. Characterized by네트워크를 통한 심사요청 방법.How to request a review over the network.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/KR2010/001882 WO2011118866A1 (en) | 2010-03-26 | 2010-03-26 | Method for evaluation request using network |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/KR2010/001882 WO2011118866A1 (en) | 2010-03-26 | 2010-03-26 | Method for evaluation request using network |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| WO2011118866A1 true WO2011118866A1 (en) | 2011-09-29 |
Family
ID=44673395
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/KR2010/001882 WO2011118866A1 (en) | 2010-03-26 | 2010-03-26 | Method for evaluation request using network |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| WO (1) | WO2011118866A1 (en) |
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US12024724B2 (en) | 2016-01-08 | 2024-07-02 | Replimune Limited | Oncolytic virus strain |
| US12059444B2 (en) | 2017-01-09 | 2024-08-13 | Replimune Limited | Altered virus |
Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2003067305A (en) * | 2001-08-30 | 2003-03-07 | Yamaha Corp | Mail distribution device and program |
| KR20030081768A (en) * | 2002-04-12 | 2003-10-22 | 신흥섭 | Method of managing clinical case |
| KR20050027897A (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2005-03-21 | 엔에이치엔(주) | Mail notifying system on network and method thereof |
| KR20060076650A (en) * | 2004-12-29 | 2006-07-04 | 사회복지법인 삼성생명공익재단 | System for reviewing irb and method thereof |
| US20100023870A1 (en) * | 2008-04-28 | 2010-01-28 | Baker Matthew R | Apparatus and method for integrated management of clinical trials and studies at an irb |
-
2010
- 2010-03-26 WO PCT/KR2010/001882 patent/WO2011118866A1/en active Application Filing
Patent Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2003067305A (en) * | 2001-08-30 | 2003-03-07 | Yamaha Corp | Mail distribution device and program |
| KR20030081768A (en) * | 2002-04-12 | 2003-10-22 | 신흥섭 | Method of managing clinical case |
| KR20050027897A (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2005-03-21 | 엔에이치엔(주) | Mail notifying system on network and method thereof |
| KR20060076650A (en) * | 2004-12-29 | 2006-07-04 | 사회복지법인 삼성생명공익재단 | System for reviewing irb and method thereof |
| US20100023870A1 (en) * | 2008-04-28 | 2010-01-28 | Baker Matthew R | Apparatus and method for integrated management of clinical trials and studies at an irb |
Cited By (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US12024724B2 (en) | 2016-01-08 | 2024-07-02 | Replimune Limited | Oncolytic virus strain |
| US12049647B2 (en) | 2016-01-08 | 2024-07-30 | Replimune Limited | Engineered virus |
| US12059444B2 (en) | 2017-01-09 | 2024-08-13 | Replimune Limited | Altered virus |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Golden et al. | Modernizing field services for human immunodeficiency virus and sexually transmitted infections in the United States | |
| Aung et al. | Interventions for increasing HIV testing uptake in migrants: a systematic review of evidence | |
| WO2011118866A1 (en) | Method for evaluation request using network | |
| McNerney et al. | Improving access to new diagnostics through harmonised regulation: priorities for action: opinion paper | |
| Belza et al. | Assessment of an outreach street-based HIV rapid testing programme as a strategy to promote early diagnosis: a comparison with two surveillance systems in Spain, 2008–2011 | |
| Costard et al. | Partitioning, a novel approach to mitigate the risk and impact of African swine fever in affected areas | |
| Vu et al. | Effectiveness of behavior change communications for reducing transmission risks among people living with HIV in 6 countries in Central America | |
| Robinson et al. | Farm animal practitioners' views on their use and expectations of veterinary diagnostic laboratories | |
| Kutner et al. | “Talking about it publicly made me feel both curious and Embarrassed”: acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of a stigma-mitigation training to increase Health Worker Comfort discussing anal sexuality in HIV Services | |
| Miller et al. | Questioning the consensus: managing carrier status results generated by newborn screening | |
| Robinson et al. | Factors influencing diagnostic sample submission by food animal veterinarians in Mississippi | |
| Montealegre et al. | Mailed self-sample HPV testing kits to improve cervical cancer screening in a safety net health system: protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial | |
| Annand et al. | Citizens' juries give verdict on whether private practice veterinarians should attend unvaccinated Hendra virus suspect horses | |
| KR20110108165A (en) | How to request a review via the network | |
| Kodama et al. | Operationalizing One Health: strategic guidance for prevention and control of emerging and re-emerging vector-borne and zoonotic diseases in the Eastern Mediterranean Region | |
| Usher et al. | Influence of COVID-19 on the preventive health behaviours of indigenous peoples of Australia residing in New South Wales: a mixed-method study protocol | |
| Maeda | The current status and future direction of clinical research in Japan from a regulatory perspective | |
| WO2012138104A2 (en) | Health insurance approval management system | |
| WO2016114538A1 (en) | Method and device for secure communication using predefined url | |
| KR20110007498A (en) | Reviewing method using network by multiple independent organization and system for the same | |
| Lu | Communication Strategies for Kidney Disease in the Time of COVID-19. | |
| Kennedy et al. | One Health security lessons from a year-long webinar series on international COVID-19 | |
| Davis et al. | Alternative approaches to partner notification, diagnosis, and treatment: Perspectives of New York county health departments, 2007 | |
| McVernon et al. | Is Australia prepared for the next pandemic? | |
| Eggerton | ISPs Prepare for Flood Of Broadband Billions: Argue flexible rules, wide access to subsidies are keys. |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application |
Ref document number: 10848508 Country of ref document: EP Kind code of ref document: A1 |
|
| NENP | Non-entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: DE |
|
| 122 | Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase |
Ref document number: 10848508 Country of ref document: EP Kind code of ref document: A1 |