IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/futbus/v9y2023i1d10.1186_s43093-023-00185-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making model in selecting pandemic hospital site

Author

Listed:
  • Alaa Alden Al Mohamed

    (Aleppo University)

  • Sobhi Al Mohamed

    (Ebla Private University)

  • Moustafa Zino

    (Aleppo University)

Abstract

One of the most important challenges for decision-makers and investors is location selection, which may be assessed using multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies. Problems with picking a location include deciding between alternative locations, analyzing alternatives, and identifying the best location for a hospital. Because they analyze options with multiple perspectives in terms of numerous competing criteria, MCDM approaches are useful instruments for solving decision-making challenges. The fuzzy set theory (FST), which represents uncertainty in human beliefs, may be effectively used with MCDM approaches to produce more sensitive, tangible, and accurate findings in this context. A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision model (FMCDM) is proposed to find the optimal location based on a combination of factors. In the first stage, the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) is used to estimate the relative criteria classification through the evaluation process. In the second stage, the fuzzy technique of order preference using similarities to the perfect solution (FTOPSIS) is applied to rank the possible alternative sites. The findings from this study indicate that integrate FAHP and FTOPSIS is the most often used FMCDM approach in Aleppo for selecting the best location for a new hospital.

Suggested Citation

  • Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed & Moustafa Zino, 2023. "Application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making model in selecting pandemic hospital site," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:futbus:v:9:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1186_s43093-023-00185-5
    DOI: 10.1186/s43093-023-00185-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s43093-023-00185-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s43093-023-00185-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Małgorzata Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek & Katarzyna Antosz & Ryszard Wyczółkowski & Dariusz Mazurkiewicz & Bo Sun & Cheng Qian & Yi Ren, 2021. "Application of MICMAC, Fuzzy AHP, and Fuzzy TOPSIS for Evaluation of the Maintenance Factors Affecting Sustainable Manufacturing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-30, March.
    3. Chen, Chen-Tung & Lin, Ching-Torng & Huang, Sue-Fn, 2006. "A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 289-301, August.
    4. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Konstantinos, Ioannou & Georgios, Tsantopoulos & Garyfalos, Arabatzis, 2019. "A Decision Support System methodology for selecting wind farm installation locations using AHP and TOPSIS: Case study in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 232-246.
    6. Hobbs, Benjamin F & Horn, Graham TF, 1997. "Building public confidence in energy planning: a multimethod MCDM approach to demand-side planning at BC gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 357-375, February.
    7. Anath Rau Krishnan & Siti Nur Aqilah & Maznah Mat Kasim & Engku Muhammad Nazri & Abdul Kamal Char, 2017. "A revised procedure to identify λ 0-measure values for applying Choquet integral in solving multi-attribute decision problems," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 54(3), pages 637-650, September.
    8. Cheng-Min Feng & Rong-Tsu Wang, 2001. "Considering the financial ratios on the performance evaluation of highway bus industry," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 449-467, January.
    9. Rajesh Kr. Singh & Angappa Gunasekaran & Pravin Kumar, 2018. "Third party logistics (3PL) selection for cold chain management: a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 531-553, August.
    10. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    11. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    12. Van Thac Dang & Jianming Wang & Wilson Van-Thac Dang, 2019. "An Integrated Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach to Assess Sustainable Urban Development in an Emerging Economy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Calabrese, Armando & Costa, Roberta & Levialdi, Nathan & Menichini, Tamara, 2019. "Integrating sustainability into strategic decision-making: A fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 155-168.
    14. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    15. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Valentinas Podvezko, 2016. "Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 267-283, March.
    16. Li, Yuhong & Zobel, Christopher W., 2020. "Exploring supply chain network resilience in the presence of the ripple effect," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    17. Liang, Gin-Shuh, 1999. "Fuzzy MCDM based on ideal and anti-ideal concepts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 682-691, February.
    18. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Streimikiene, Dalia & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil M.D. & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2016. "Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy saving technologies and solutions in five star hotels: A new hierarchical framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 131-148.
    19. 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.
    20. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    21. Majid Kavosi & Reza Kiani Mavi, 2011. "Fuzzy quality functiondeployment approach using TOPSIS and analytic hierarchy process methods," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(3), pages 304-324.
    22. Lin, Hung-Tso & Chang, Wen-Ling, 2008. "Order selection and pricing methods using flexible quantity and fuzzy approach for buyer evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(2), pages 415-428, June.
    23. Milan Janic, 2003. "Multicriteria Evaluation of High-speed Rail, Transrapid Maglev and Air Passenger Transport in Europe," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 491-512, December.
    24. Ceren Erdin & Halil Emre Akbaş, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for the Location Selection of Shopping Malls: A Case Study from Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed & Morhaf Alebrahem, 2024. "The remote revolution: assessing the impact of working from home on finance professionals," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Alhassan, Hadisu & Peleato, Nicolás & Sadiq, Rehan, 2023. "Mercury risk reduction in artisanal and small-scale gold mining: A fuzzy AHP-Fuzzy TOPSIS hybrid analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    3. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed, 2023. "Application of fuzzy group decision-making selecting green supplier: a case study of the manufacture of natural laurel soap," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Anas A. Makki & Reda M. S. Abdulaal, 2023. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach Based on Fuzzy MEREC-G and Fuzzy RATMI," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Gupta, Soniya & Joshi, Dheeraj Kumar & Awasthi, Natasha & Pant, Manish & Joshi, Bhagawati prasad & Chaube, Shshank, 2024. "Distance and similarity measures of Hesitant bi-fuzzy set and its applications in renewable energy systems," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 321-336.

    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. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    2. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    3. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    4. Rađenović Žarko & Veselinović Ivana, 2017. "Integrated AHP-TOPSIS Method for the Assessment of Health Management Information Systems Efficiency," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 55(1), pages 121-142, March.
    5. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(3), pages 1042-1055.
    6. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed, 2023. "Application of fuzzy group decision-making selecting green supplier: a case study of the manufacture of natural laurel soap," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Styliani Karamountzou & Dimitra G. Vagiona, 2023. "Suitability and Sustainability Assessment of Existing Onshore Wind Farms in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    8. Bottani, Eleonora & Rizzi, Antonio, 2008. "An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection--An application oriented to lead-time reduction," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 763-781, February.
    9. Chaofeng Li & Yasir Ahmed Solangi & Sharafat Ali, 2023. "Evaluating the Factors of Green Finance to Achieve Carbon Peak and Carbon Neutrality Targets in China: A Delphi and Fuzzy AHP Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Ceren Erdin & Halil Emre Akbaş, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for the Location Selection of Shopping Malls: A Case Study from Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    12. Fausto Cavallaro & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Saulius Raslanas, 2016. "Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems Using Fuzzy Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-21, June.
    13. Höfer, Tim & Sunak, Yasin & Siddique, Hafiz & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Wind farm siting using a spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process approach: A case study of the Städteregion Aachen," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 222-243.
    14. Awasthi, Anjali & Chauhan, Satyaveer S. & Goyal, S.K., 2010. "A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 370-378, August.
    15. Abastante, Francesca & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Lami, Isabella M., 2018. "Choice architecture for architecture choices: Evaluating social housing initiatives putting together a parsimonious AHP methodology and the Choquet integral," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 748-762.
    16. Salih YILDIZ & Emel YILDIZ, 2015. "Service Quality Evaluation of Restaurants Using The Ahp And Topsis Method," Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, KSP Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 53-61, June.
    17. Beynon, Malcolm, 2002. "An analysis of distributions of priority values from alternative comparison scales within AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 104-117, July.
    18. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    19. Dong, Yucheng & Liu, Yating & Liang, Haiming & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2018. "Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 154-164.
    20. 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.

    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:spr:futbus:v:9:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1186_s43093-023-00185-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.