Choices, Choices: The Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to a Food Safety Decision-Making Problem

2008 ◽  
Vol 71 (11) ◽  
pp. 2323-2333 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. FAZIL ◽  
A. RAJIC ◽  
J. SANCHEZ ◽  
S. MCEWEN
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Food Safety ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analysis Approach ◽  
Weight Of Evidence ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Difficult Decision ◽  
Safety Interventions

In the food safety arena, the decision-making process can be especially difficult. Decision makers are often faced with social and fiscal pressures when attempting to identify an appropriate balance among several choices. Concurrently, policy and decision makers in microbial food safety are under increasing pressure to demonstrate that their policies and decisions are made using transparent and accountable processes. In this article, we present a multi-criteria decision analysis approach that can be used to address the problem of trying to select a food safety intervention while balancing various criteria. Criteria that are important when selecting an intervention were determined, as a result of an expert consultation, to include effectiveness, cost, weight of evidence, and practicality associated with the interventions. The multi-criteria decision analysis approach we present is able to consider these criteria and arrive at a ranking of interventions. It can also provide a clear justification for the ranking as well as demonstrate to stakeholders, through a scenario analysis approach, how to potentially converge toward common ground. While this article focuses on the problem of selecting food safety interventions, the range of applications in the food safety arena is truly diverse and can be a significant tool in assisting decisions that need to be coherent, transparent, and justifiable. Most importantly, it is a significant contributor when there is a need to strike a fine balance between various potentially competing alternatives and/or stakeholder groups.

scholarly journals An Innovative Grey Approach for Group Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Based on the Median of Ratings by Using Python

Axioms ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 124
Author(s):  
Dragiša Stanujkić ◽  
Darjan Karabašević ◽  
Gabrijela Popović ◽  
Predrag S. Stanimirović ◽  
Florentin Smarandache ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Likert Scale ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Interval Numbers ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis

Some decision-making problems, i.e., multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) problems, require taking into account the attitudes of a large number of decision-makers and/or respondents. Therefore, an approach to the transformation of crisp ratings, collected from respondents, in grey interval numbers form based on the median of collected scores, i.e., ratings, is considered in this article. In this way, the simplicity of collecting respondents’ attitudes using crisp values, i.e., by applying some form of Likert scale, is combined with the advantages that can be achieved by using grey interval numbers. In this way, a grey extension of MCDA methods is obtained. The application of the proposed approach was considered in the example of evaluating the websites of tourism organizations by using several MCDA methods. Additionally, an analysis of the application of the proposed approach in the case of a large number of respondents, done in Python, is presented. The advantages of the proposed method, as well as its possible limitations, are summarized.

PATIENT-CENTERED DECISION MAKING: LESSONS FROM MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS FOR QUANTIFYING PATIENT PREFERENCES

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Marsh ◽  
J. Jaime Caro ◽  
Erica Zaiser ◽  
James Heywood ◽  
Alaa Hamed
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Healthcare Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Healthcare Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Objectives: Patient preferences should be a central consideration in healthcare decision making. However, stories of patients challenging regulatory and reimbursement decisions has led to questions on whether patient voices are being considered sufficiently during those decision making processes. This has led some to argue that it is necessary to quantify patient preferences before they can be adequately considered.Methods: This study considers the lessons from the use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for efforts to quantify patient preferences. It defines MCDA and summarizes the benefits it can provide to decision makers, identifies examples of MCDAs that have involved patients, and summarizes good practice guidelines as they relate to quantifying patient preferences.Results: The guidance developed to support the use of MCDA in healthcare provide some useful considerations for the quantification of patient preferences, namely that researchers should give appropriate consideration to: the heterogeneity of patient preferences, and its relevance to decision makers; the cognitive challenges posed by different elicitation methods; and validity of the results they produce. Furthermore, it is important to consider how the relevance of these considerations varies with the decision being supported.Conclusions: The MCDA literature holds important lessons for how patient preferences should be quantified to support healthcare decision making.

scholarly journals A Novel Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Technique Considering Various Essential Characteristics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susmita Bandyopadhyay
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Information Content ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Analysis Technique ◽  
Different Types

Abstract This paper has proposed a novel Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique that considers relationships among the criteria, relationships among the alternatives, relationships among the criteria and the alternatives, the uncertainty or dilemma that the decision makers face in their decision making, the entropy among the criteria. The dilemma of the decision makers has been captured through the use of Hesitant Fuzzy Elements; the information content among the criteria has been captured by applying the concept of entropy through the application of a technique called IDOCRIW. A kind of sensitivity analysis has been performed to verify the effectiveness of the proposed technique. The proposed method has also been compared with four different types of already existing MCDA techniques, AHP, MAUT, MACBETH and MOORA. Both the sensitivity analysis and the comparison with other methods establish the effectiveness of the proposed technique.

An Improved Approach to Analyze Accidents and Promote Road Safety using Association Rule Mining and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 731-746
Author(s):  
Farhat Zeinab ◽  
Karouni Ali ◽  
Daya Bassam ◽  
Chauvet Pierre
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Association Rule ◽  
Road Safety ◽  
Association Rule Mining ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Road Accidents ◽  
Rule Mining ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Electre Tri

Background: Road accidents have become a major social and health problem for being dramatically increasing day after day worldwide. Scientists are conducting their studies to define the main attributes that share the severity of road accidents. Finding a new approach to analyze road accidents is of great urgency. Data mining techniques are best fitting to discover useful information out of enormous data which are used to make proactive decisions. Methods: This paper tempts a rule-based machine learning method known as association rule mining, which can identify strong rules discovered in databases using interesting measures. Given a data- set from the Lebanese territory for the years 2016-2017, the application of association rule mining, the Apriori method takes its place. However, its implementation leads to a very large number of rules. The task that is the most difficult is extracting meaningful and non-redundant rules. In order to find out the most interesting and relevant rules out of fatal rules such, ELECTRE TRI and PROMETHEE methods, the most significant methods of decision making, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) are integrated to resolve the outranking problem. The integration is presented by the use of the same set of weights and the same constant values of Indifference and Preference thresholds used in ELECTRE-TRI method to define the linear preference function needed by PROMETHEE method. Realizing the sensitivity of the final output of alternatives ranking to the changes of the input parameters of the decision-making tool, this proposed integration helps the decision makers to overcome their ambivalence between preference and indifference thresholds and to cope adequately with the issue of the uncertainty of MCDA procedures; it comes up with the complete ranking of rules. Results: The obtained ranked rules declare the most significant attributes or combinations of attributes that influence the severity of road accidents. Four main factors of fatal road accidents are pinpointed: over-speeding mainly leading up to rollover crashes, pedestrians encountering in the context, distracted driving leading to fatal road vehicle collisions with Pedestrian victims; and wet roads particularly in the case of single car accidents. Meanwhile, the importance of ELECRE-TRI and PROMETHEE and their integration in dealing with such complex phenomena and corresponding database with a large number of involved attributes have been validated. Conclusion: This paper studies the phenomenon of road accidents. Association rule mining has been applied to discover all possible relations between the various attributes. The integration of ELECTRE- TRI and PROMETHEE MCDA techniques aims at extracting meaningful information from the big dataset. The obtained results have shown how influencing the behavior of the driver is on the occurrence of fatal road accidents. These findings contribute to supporting decision makers to draw new design conceptions for road infrastructure and develop preventive measures that improve road safety in Lebanon.

Can multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) be implemented into real-world drug decision-making processes? A Canadian provincial experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 434-439
Author(s):  
Tracey-Lea Laba ◽  
Bashir Jiwani ◽  
Robert Crossland ◽  
Craig Mitton
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Communication Networks ◽  
Shared Vision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Drug Reimbursement ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Expert Advisory ◽  
Independent Expert

ObjectiveTo describe the implementation of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) into a Canadian public drug reimbursement decision-making process, identifying the aspects of the MCDA approach, and the context that promoted uptake.MethodsNarrative summary of case study describing the how, when, and why of implementing MCDA.ResultsFaced with a fixed budget, a pipeline of expensive but potentially valuable drugs, and potential delays to drug decision making, the Ministry of Health (i.e., decision makers) and its independent expert advisory committee (IAB) sought alternative values-based decision processes. MCDA was considered highly compatible with current processes, but the ability as a stand-alone intervention to address issues of opportunity cost was unclear. The IAB nevertheless collaboratively voted to implement an externally developed MCDA with support from decision makers. After several months of engagement and piloting, implementation was rapid and leveraged strong pre-existing formal and informal communication networks. The IAB as a whole rates new submissions which serves as an input into the deliberative process.ConclusionsMCDA can be a highly adaptable approach that can be implemented into a functioning drug reimbursement setting when facilitated by (i) a truly limited budget; (ii) a shared vision for change by end-users and decision makers; (iii) using pre-existing deliberative processes; and (iv) viewing the approach as a decision framework rather than the decision (when appropriate). Given the current limitations of MCDA, implementing an academically imperfect tool first and evaluating later reflects a practical solution to real-time fiscal constraints and impending delays to drug approvals that may be faced by decision makers.

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Healthcare Decision-Making

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Hansen ◽  
Nancy Devlin
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Healthcare Decision ◽  
Main Subject ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Healthcare Decision Making ◽  
Repeated Applications ◽  
Additive Equation

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support healthcare decision-making. MCDA involves decision makers evaluating the alternatives under consideration based on the explicit weighting of criteria relevant to the overarching decision—in order to, depending on the application, rank (or prioritize) or choose between the alternatives. A prominent example of MCDA applied to healthcare decision-making that has received a lot of attention in recent years and is the main subject of this article is choosing which health “technologies” (i.e., drugs, devices, procedures, etc.) to fund—a process known as health technology assessment (HTA). Other applications include prioritizing patients for surgery, prioritizing diseases for R&D, and decision-making about licensing treatments. Most applications are based on weighted-sum models. Such models involve explicitly weighting the criteria and rating the alternatives on the criteria, with each alternative’s “performance” on the criteria aggregated using a linear (i.e., additive) equation to produce the alternative’s “total score,” by which the alternatives are ranked. The steps involved in a MCDA process are explained, including an overview of methods for scoring alternatives on the criteria and weighting the criteria. The steps are: structuring the decision problem being addressed, specifying criteria, measuring alternatives’ performance, scoring alternatives on the criteria and weighting the criteria, applying the scores and weights to rank the alternatives, and presenting the MCDA results, including sensitivity analysis, to decision makers to support their decision-making. Arguments recently advanced against using MCDA for HTA and counterarguments are also considered. Finally, five questions associated with how MCDA for HTA is operationalized are discussed: Whose preferences are relevant for MCDA? Should criteria and weights be decision-specific or identical for repeated applications? How should cost or cost-effectiveness be included in MCDA? How can the opportunity cost of decisions be captured in MCDA? How can uncertainty be incorporated into MCDA?

A Novel Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Technique Incorporating Demanding Essential Characteristics of Existing MCDA Techniques

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susmita Bandyopadhyay
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Information Content ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Rank Reversal ◽  
Analysis Technique ◽  
Different Types

Abstract This paper has proposed a novel Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique that considers relationships among the criteria, relationships among the alternatives, relationships among the criteria and the alternatives, the uncertainty or dilemma that the decision makers face in their decision-making, the entropy among the criteria. These characteristics seem to be the essential characteristics of various MCDA techniques as evident from the existing literature. The dilemma of the decision makers have been captured by the use of Hesitant Fuzzy Elements; the information content among the criteria have been captured by applying the concept of entropy through the application of a technique called IDOCRIW. Relationships have been determined by calculating the covariances among the criteria and among the alternatives. A kind of sensitivity analysis, rank reversal method has been performed to verify the effectiveness of the proposed technique. The proposed method has also been compared with four different types of already existing MCDA techniques, AHP, MAUT, MACBETH and MOORA. Both the sensitivity analysis and the comparison with other methods establish the effectiveness of the proposed technique.

DRUG EVALUATION AND DECISION MAKING IN CATALONIA: DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK BASED ON MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS (MCDA) FOR ORPHAN DRUGS

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoni Gilabert-Perramon ◽  
Josep Torrent-Farnell ◽  
Arancha Catalan ◽  
Alba Prat ◽  
Manel Fontanet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Unmet Needs ◽  
Drug Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Orphan Drugs ◽  
Methodological Framework ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Weighting Technique

Objectives:The aim of this study was to adapt and assess the value of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework (EVIDEM) for the evaluation of Orphan drugs in Catalonia (Catalan Health Service).Methods:The standard evaluation and decision-making procedures of CatSalut were compared with the EVIDEM methodology and contents. The EVIDEM framework was adapted to the Catalan context, focusing on the evaluation of Orphan drugs (PASFTAC program), during a Workshop with sixteen PASFTAC members. The criteria weighting was done using two different techniques (nonhierarchical and hierarchical). Reliability was assessed by re-test.Results:The EVIDEM framework and methodology was found useful and feasible for Orphan drugs evaluation and decision making in Catalonia. All the criteria considered for the development of the CatSalut Technical Reports and decision making were considered in the framework. Nevertheless, the framework could improve the reporting of some of these criteria (i.e., “unmet needs” or “nonmedical costs”). Some Contextual criteria were removed (i.e., “Mandate and scope of healthcare system”, “Environmental impact”) or adapted (“population priorities and access”) for CatSalut purposes. Independently of the weighting technique considered, the most important evaluation criteria identified for orphan drugs were: “disease severity”, “unmet needs” and “comparative effectiveness”, while the “size of the population” had the lowest relevance for decision making. Test–retest analysis showed weight consistency among techniques, supporting reliability overtime.Conclusions:MCDA (EVIDEM framework) could be a useful tool to complement the current evaluation methods of CatSalut, contributing to standardization and pragmatism, providing a method to tackle ethical dilemmas and facilitating discussions related to decision making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document