La opinión pública colombiana sobre el acuerdo de paz 2016-2020: punitivismo, desconfianza y ostracismo / Colombian public opinion on the 2016-2020 peace agreement: punitivism, distrust and ostracism / Opinião pública colombiana sobre o acordo de paz de 2016-2020: punitivismo, desconfiança e ostracismo

Después de varias décadas de conflicto armado en Colombia, el Gobierno colombiano y las Farc-EP firmaron, en 2016, el Acuerdo Final para la terminación del conflicto y la construcción de una paz estable y duradera. No obstante, este acuerdo no fue refrendado por la ciudadanía, en un plebiscito celebrado ese mismo año. En 2018, ganó las elecciones presidenciales un candidato que prometió cambiar las condiciones del Acuerdos Final y modificar uno de sus principales instrumentos: la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz (JEP). En ese contexto esta investigación se pregunta: ¿cuál es la opinión de los colombianos sobre el Acuerdo Final y la JEP? La investigación indaga en las opiniones de los colombianos a través de un análisis estadístico comparativo de tres encuestas de opinión de 2016, 2018 y 2020. Los resultados detallan los cambios actitudinales ocurridos en esos años, como la disminución del rechazo frontal a los Acuerdos de Paz y el leve incremento de las posibilidades de reintegración de los excombatientes a la vida civil. También, expone algunas reticencias al cambio, como la desconfianza persistente, la reafirmación del rechazo al indulto de los excombatientes (punitivismo) y a su participación política (ostracismo).

After several decades of armed conflict in Colombia, the Colombian Government and the Farc-EP signed, in 2016, the Final Agreement for the termination of the conflict and the construction of a stable and lasting peace. However, this agreement was not endorsed by the citizenry, in a plebiscite held that same year. In 2018, the presidential elections were won by a candidate who promised to change the conditions of the Final Agreement and to modify one of its main instruments: the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP). In this context, this research asks: what is the opinion of Colombians on the Final Agreement and the SJP? The research inquiries into the opinions of Colombians through a comparative statistical analysis of three opinion polls from 2016, 2018 and 2020. The results detail the attitudinal changes that occurred in those years, such as the decrease in the frontal rejection of the Peace Accords and the slight increase in the possibilities of reintegration of ex-combatants to civilian life. It also exposes some reluctance to change, such as persistent distrust, the reaffirmation of the rejection of pardoning ex-combatants (punitivism) and their political participation (ostracism).

Após várias décadas de conflito armado na Colômbia, o governo colombiano e as FARC-EP assinaram, em 2016, o Acordo Final para o fim do conflito e a construção de uma paz estável e duradoura. Entretanto, este acordo não foi endossado pelos cidadãos em um plebiscito realizado no mesmo ano. Em 2018, as eleições presidenciais foram ganhas por um candidato que prometeu mudar as condições do Acordo Final e modificar um de seus principais instrumentos: a Jurisdição Especial para a Paz (JEP). Neste contexto, esta pesquisa pergunta: qual é a opinião dos colombianos sobre o Acordo Final e o SJP? A pesquisa investiga as opiniões dos colombianos através de uma análise estatística comparativa de três pesquisas de opinião de 2016, 2018 e 2020. Os resultados detalham as mudanças de atitude que ocorreram nesses anos, tais como a diminuição da rejeição direta dos Acordos de Paz e o leve aumento das possibilidades de reintegração de ex-combatentes na vida civil. Também expõe alguma relutância em mudar, como a desconfiança persistente, a reafirmação da rejeição do perdão de ex-combatentes (punitivismo) e de sua participação política (ostracismo).

An opinion poll regarding the national licensure examination for clinical instructors and trainees within 2 years of passing the examination / 医学教育

We sent questionnaires to clinical instructors and trainees within 2 years of the latter passing the national licensure examination for medical practitioners to investigate their opinions about the examination and to improve its style. Most instructors wanted to change the examination into an ideal style; however, the trainees had positive comments about the present examination. Several problems came to light, including whether the present examination is asking the minimum requirements for initial training and what the necessary actions are for assessing clinical skills. We must take measures to improve the examination.

An analysis of opinion polls for family medicine specialists on the implementation of family doctor registration system in Korea

BACKGROUND: Since the Independence in 1945, the Republic of Korea (ROK) has maintained fundamentally the liberal health care system by the influence of U.S.A. Therefore, as in the case of U.S.A., the primary health care system of ROK has fallen in the chaos. Recently, the new government of ROK seems to retry the introduction of 'Family Doctor Registration System (FDRS)' in spite of the 1996's failure. In order to conduct FDRS efficiently, there should be a thorough investigation on the opinions of doctors and people in the community. This study was conducted with a view to collecting necessary information regarding the implementation of FDRS. METHODS: By mailing, the self-administered questionnaires were collected twice during March 18 to May 12 in 1998. The questionnaire had been prepared through several discussions, pretest, and final correction by five family physicians and two health care policy professors. The subjects consisted of 2,093 family physicians. RESULTS: Though the overall response rate was only 28.2% (591) subjects, age distribution for the study subjects was similar to that of average family physicians. The subjects consisted of 451 males and 138 females. The number of those whose age was less than 40 was 49.9% (195). "The group that agrees with the introduction of FDRS" was 58.5% of all respondents; "the group that objects 14.4%; and the group undetermined" 24.7%. The 73.6% of all respondents had negative opinion on increased administrative work. Only 21.3% expected their net income to increase. On multiple logistic regression analysis, relatively large city rather than metropolitan Seoul, the smaller number of visiting patients a month, regular resident training experience, and male sex resulted in having a significant positive relationship with the introduction of FDRS. Further analyses are called for to identify differences of opinions between family physicians and single specialty medical practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey should be reflected into the health care policy when retrying to implement FDRS in Korea.