scholarly journals Decision support models for supplier development: Systematic literature review and research agenda

2017 ◽  
Vol 193 ◽  
pp. 798-812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph H. Glock ◽  
Eric H. Grosse ◽  
Jörg M. Ries
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Schaarup ◽  
Louise Bilenberg Pape-Haugaard ◽  
Ole Kristian Hejlesen

BACKGROUND Chronic wounds such as diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and pressure ulcers are a massive burden to health care facilities. Many randomized controlled trials on different wound care elements have been conducted and published in the Cochrane Library, all of which have only a low evidential basis. Thus, health care professionals are forced to rely on their own experience when making decisions regarding wound care. To progress from experience-based practice to evidence-based wound care practice, clinical decision support systems (CDSS) that help health care providers with decision-making in a clinical workflow have been developed. These systems have proven useful in many areas of the health care sector, partly because they have increased the quality of care, and partially because they have generated a solid basis for evidence-based practice. However, no systematic reviews focus on CDSS within the field of wound care to chronic wounds. OBJECTIVE The aims of this systematic literature review are (1) to identify models used in CDSS that support health care professionals treating chronic wounds, and (2) to classify each clinical decision support model according to selected variables and to create an overview. METHODS A systematic review was conducted using 6 databases. This systematic literature review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement for systematic reviews. The search strategy consisted of three facets, respectively: Facet 1 (Algorithm), Facet 2 (Wound care) and Facet 3 (Clinical decision support system). Studies based on acute wounds or trauma were excluded. Similarly, studies that presented guidelines, protocols and instructions were excluded, since they do not require progression along an active chain of reasoning from the clinicians, just their focus. Finally, studies were excluded if they had not undergone a peer review process. The following aspects were extracted from each article: authors, year, country, the sample size of data and variables describing the type of clinical decision support models. The decision support models were classified in 2 ways: quantitative decision support models, and qualitative decision support models. RESULTS The final number of studies included in the systematic literature review was 10. These clinical decision support models included 4/10 (40%) quantitative decision support models and 6/10 (60%) qualitative decision support models. The earliest article was published in 2007, and the most recent was from 2015. CONCLUSIONS The clinical decision support models were targeted at a variety of different types of chronic wounds. The degree of accessibility of the inference engines varied. Quantitative models served as the engine and were invisible to the health care professionals, while qualitative models required interaction with the user.


Logistics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Guilherme F. Frederico

The main purpose of this paper is to present what the Industry 5.0 phenomenon means in the supply chain context. A systematic literature review method was used to get evidence from the current knowledge linked to this theme. The results have evidenced a strong gap related to Industry 5.0 approaches for the supply chain field. Forty-one (41) publications, including conference and journal papers, have been found in the literature. Nineteen (19) words, which were grouped in four (4) clusters, have been identified in the data analysis. This was the basis to form the four (4) constructs of Industry 5.0: Industry Strategy, Innovation and Technologies, Society and Sustainability, and Transition Issues. Then, an alignment with the supply chain context was proposed, being the basis for the incipient Supply Chain 5.0 framework and its research agenda. Industry 5.0 is still in an embryonic and ideal stage. The literature is scarce and many other concepts and discoveries are going to emerge. Although this literature review is based on few available sources, it provides insightful and novel concepts related to Industry 5.0 in the supply chain context. Moreover, it presents a clear set of constructs and a structured research agenda to encourage researchers in deploying further conceptual and empirical works linked to the subject herein explored. Organizations’ leadership, policymakers, and other practitioners involved in supply chains, and mainly those currently working with Industry 4.0 initiatives, can benefit from this research by having clear guidance regarding the dimensions needed to structurally design and implement an Industry 5.0 strategy. This article adds valuable insights to researchers and practitioners, by approaching the newest and revolutionary concept of the Industry 5.0 phenomenon in the supply chain context, which is still an unexplored theme.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 4129
Author(s):  
Manuel Sousa ◽  
Maria Fatima Almeida ◽  
Rodrigo Calili

Multiple-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods have been widely employed in various fields and disciplines, including decision problems regarding Sustainable Development (SD) issues. The main objective of this paper is to present a systematic literature review (SLR) on MCDM methods supporting decisions focusing on the achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in regional, national, or local contexts. In this regard, 143 published scientific articles from 2016 to 2020 were retrieved from the Scopus database, selected and reviewed. They were categorized according to the decision problem associated with SDGs issues, the MCDM methodological approach, including the use (or not) of fuzzy set theory, sensitivity analysis, and multistakeholder approaches, the context of MCDM applications, and the MCDM classification (if utility-based, compromise, multi-objective, outranking, or other MCDM methods). The widespread adoption of MCDM methods in complex contexts confirms that they can help decision-makers solve multidimensional problems associated with key issues within the 2030 Agenda framework. Besides, the state-of-art review provides an improved understanding of this research field and directions for building a research agenda for those interested in advancing the research on MCDM applications in issues associated with the 2030 Agenda framework.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document