IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3731-d776854.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance Evaluation of Hospital Site Suitability Using Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Models in Malacca, Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • Khaled Yousef Almansi

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang 43400, Malaysia)

  • Abdul Rashid Mohamed Shariff

    (Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang 43400, Malaysia)

  • Bahareh Kalantar

    (RIKEN Center of Advanced Intelligence Project, The Goal-Oriented Technology Research Group, Disaster Resilience Science Team, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan)

  • Ahmad Fikri Abdullah

    (Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang 43400, Malaysia)

  • Sharifah Norkhadijah Syed Ismail

    (Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang 43400, Malaysia)

  • Naonori Ueda

    (RIKEN Center of Advanced Intelligence Project, The Goal-Oriented Technology Research Group, Disaster Resilience Science Team, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan)

Abstract

This study focuses on suitable site identification for constructing a hospital in Malacca, Malaysia. Using significant environmental, topographic, and geodemographic factors, the study evaluated and compared machine learning (ML) and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for hospital site suitability mapping to discover the highest influential factors that minimize the error ratio and maximize the effectiveness of the suitability investigation. Identification of the most significant conditioning parameters that impact the choice of an appropriate hospital site was accomplished using correlation-based feature selection (CFS) with a search algorithm (greedy stepwise). To model the potential hospital site map, we utilized multilayer perceptron (MLP) and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) models. The outcome of the predicted site models was validated utilizing CFS 10-fold cross-validation, as well as ROC curve (receiver operating characteristic curve). The analysis of CFS indicated a very high correlation with R2 values of 0.99 for the MLP model. However, the ROC curve indicated a prediction accuracy of 80% for the MLP model and 83% for the AHP model. The findings revealed that the MLP model is reliable and consistent with the AHP. It is a sufficiently promising approach to the location suitability of hospitals to ensure effective planning and performance of healthcare delivery.

Suggested Citation

  • Khaled Yousef Almansi & Abdul Rashid Mohamed Shariff & Bahareh Kalantar & Ahmad Fikri Abdullah & Sharifah Norkhadijah Syed Ismail & Naonori Ueda, 2022. "Performance Evaluation of Hospital Site Suitability Using Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Models in Malacca, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-36, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3731-:d:776854
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3731/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3731/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paweł Ziemba & Jarosław Wątróbski & Jarosław Jankowski & Mateusz Piwowarski, 2016. "Research on the Properties of the AHP in the Environment of Inaccurate Expert Evaluations," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Kesra Nermend & Małgorzata Łatuszyńska (ed.), Selected Issues in Experimental Economics, edition 1, chapter 0, pages 227-243, Springer.
    2. Borra, Simone & Di Ciaccio, Agostino, 2010. "Measuring the prediction error. A comparison of cross-validation, bootstrap and covariance penalty methods," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(12), pages 2976-2989, December.
    3. Al Garni, Hassan Z. & Awasthi, Anjali, 2017. "Solar PV power plant site selection using a GIS-AHP based approach with application in Saudi Arabia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1225-1240.
    4. Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Nematollahi, Omid & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza, 2019. "A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant site selection in different climates: A case study in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 958-973.
    5. Nyimbili, Penjani Hopkins & Erden, Turan, 2020. "GIS-based fuzzy multi-criteria approach for optimal site selection of fire stations in Istanbul, Turkey," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Erbaş, Mehmet & Kabak, Mehmet & Özceylan, Eren & Çetinkaya, Cihan, 2018. "Optimal siting of electric vehicle charging stations: A GIS-based fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1017-1031.
    7. Mateus, Ricardo & Ferreira, J.A. & Carreira, Joao, 2008. "Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA): Central Porto high-speed railway station," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    9. Jung In Kim & Devini Manouri Senaratna & Jacobo Ruza & Calvin Kam & Sandy Ng, 2015. "Feasibility Study on an Evidence-Based Decision-Support System for Hospital Site Selection for an Aging Population," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    11. Dell’Ovo, Marta & Capolongo, Stefano & Oppio, Alessandra, 2018. "Combining spatial analysis with MCDA for the siting of healthcare facilities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 634-644.
    12. Chaudhary, Pandav & Chhetri, Sachin Kumar & Joshi, Kiran Man & Shrestha, Basanta Man & Kayastha, Prabin, 2016. "Application of an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in the GIS interface for suitable fire site selection: A case study from Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Nepal," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 60-71.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jane Rose Atwongyeire & Arkom Palamanit & Adul Bennui & Mohammad Shakeri & Kuaanan Techato & Shahid Ali, 2022. "Assessment of Suitable Areas for Smart Grid of Power Generated from Renewable Energy Resources in Western Uganda," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-31, February.
    2. Caprioli, Caterina & Bottero, Marta, 2021. "Addressing complex challenges in transformations and planning: A fuzzy spatial multicriteria analysis for identifying suitable locations for urban infrastructures," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Noorollahi, Younes & Ghenaatpisheh Senani, Ali & Fadaei, Ahmad & Simaee, Mobina & Moltames, Rahim, 2022. "A framework for GIS-based site selection and technical potential evaluation of PV solar farm using Fuzzy-Boolean logic and AHP multi-criteria decision-making approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 89-104.
    4. Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza & Homaee, Mehdi & Nematollahi, Omid, 2022. "The site selection of wind energy power plant using GIS-multi-criteria evaluation from economic perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    5. Tercan, Emre & Eymen, Abdurrahman & Urfalı, Tuğrul & Saracoglu, Burak Omer, 2021. "A sustainable framework for spatial planning of photovoltaic solar farms using GIS and multi-criteria assessment approach in Central Anatolia, Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Günen, Mehmet Akif, 2021. "A comprehensive framework based on GIS-AHP for the installation of solar PV farms in Kahramanmaraş, Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 212-225.
    7. Bashar Bashir & Abdullah Alsalman & Arsalan Ahmed Othman & Ahmed K. Obaid & Hussein Bashir, 2021. "New Approach to Selecting Civil Defense Centers in Al-Riyadh City (KSA) Based on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and GIS," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Gil-García, Isabel C. & Ramos-Escudero, Adela & García-Cascales, M.S. & Dagher, Habib & Molina-García, A., 2022. "Fuzzy GIS-based MCDM solution for the optimal offshore wind site selection: The Gulf of Maine case," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 130-147.
    9. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Odigie, O. & Munda, J.L., 2018. "A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1853-1869.
    10. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    11. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    13. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    14. Alpana Agarwal & Divina Raghav, 2023. "Analysing Determinants of Employee Performance Based on Reverse Mentoring and Employer Branding Using Analytic Hierarchical Process," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 48(3), pages 343-358, August.
    15. Sadiq Ullah & Mudassar Iqbal & Muhammad Waseem & Adnan Abbas & Muhammad Masood & Ghulam Nabi & Muhammad Atiq Ur Rehman Tariq & Muhammad Sadam, 2024. "Potential Sites for Rainwater Harvesting Focusing on the Sustainable Development Goals Using Remote Sensing and Geographical Information System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-23, October.
    16. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    17. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Andre Bender & Allan Din & Philippe Favarger & Martin Hoesli & Janne Laakso, 1997. "An Analysis of Perceptions Concerning the Environmental Quality of Housing in Geneva," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 34(3), pages 503-513, March.
    19. Fabio Blanco-Mesa & Anna M. Gil-Lafuente & José M. Merigó, 2018. "Subjective stakeholder dynamics relationships treatment: a methodological approach using fuzzy decision-making," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 441-472, December.
    20. Prabhat Kumar & Puneet Tandon, 2019. "A paradigm for customer-driven product design approach using extended axiomatic design," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 589-603, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3731-:d:776854. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.