Bertalan Németh1, Anett Molnár1, Sándor Bozóki2,3, Kalman Wijaya4, András Inotai1,5, Jonathan D Campbell6, Zoltán Kaló1,5. 1. Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary. 2. Laboratory on Engineering & Management Intelligence, Research Group of Operations Research & Decision Systems, Institute for Computer Science & Control, Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA SZTAKI), Budapest, Hungary. 3. Department of Operations Research & Actuarial Sciences, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary. 4. Abbott Established Pharmaceutical Division, Basel, Switzerland. 5. Department of Health Policy & Health Economics, Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Budapest, Hungary. 6. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Abstract
AIM: Criteria weighting is a key element of multicriteria decision analysis that is becoming extensively used in healthcare decision-making. In our narrative review we describe the advantages and disadvantages of various weighting methods. METHODS: An assessment of the eight identified primary criteria weighting methods was compiled on domains including their resource requirements, and potential for bias. RESULTS: In general, we found more complex methods to have less potential for bias; however, resource intensity and general participant burden is greater for these methods. CONCLUSION: The selection of the most appropriate method depends on the decision-making context. The simple multiattribute rating technique (SMART) method combined with swing-weighting technique and the analytic hierarchy process methods may be the most feasible approaches for low- and middle-income countries.
AIM: Criteria weighting is a key element of multicriteria decision analysis that is becoming extensively used in healthcare decision-making. In our narrative review we describe the advantages and disadvantages of various weighting methods. METHODS: An assessment of the eight identified primary criteria weighting methods was compiled on domains including their resource requirements, and potential for bias. RESULTS: In general, we found more complex methods to have less potential for bias; however, resource intensity and general participant burden is greater for these methods. CONCLUSION: The selection of the most appropriate method depends on the decision-making context. The simple multiattribute rating technique (SMART) method combined with swing-weighting technique and the analytic hierarchy process methods may be the most feasible approaches for low- and middle-income countries.
Entities:
Keywords:
MCDA; criteria weighting methods; low- and middle-income countries
Authors: Renan Felinto de Farias Aires; Camila Cristina Rodrigues Salgado Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-13 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Ivett Jakab; Melanie D Whittington; Elizabeth Franklin; Susan Raiola; Jonathan D Campbell; Zoltán Kaló; R Brett McQueen Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 5.810