490 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26368541)
1. An Integrated Approach of Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Based AHP and Fuzzy COPRAS for Machine Tool Evaluation.
Nguyen HT; Md Dawal SZ; Nukman Y; Aoyama H; Case K
PLoS One; 2015; 10(9):e0133599. PubMed ID: 26368541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An Integrated MCDM Model for Conveyor Equipment Evaluation and Selection in an FMC Based on a Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy ARAS in the Presence of Vagueness.
Nguyen HT; Dawal SZ; Nukman Y; Rifai AP; Aoyama H
PLoS One; 2016; 11(4):e0153222. PubMed ID: 27070543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The use of multi-criteria decision making models in evaluating anesthesia method options in circumcision surgery.
Hancerliogullari G; Hancerliogullari KO; Koksalmis E
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2017 Jan; 17(1):14. PubMed ID: 28114944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An experimental comparison of fuzzy logic and analytic hierarchy process for medical decision support systems.
Uzoka FM; Obot O; Barker K; Osuji J
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2011 Jul; 103(1):10-27. PubMed ID: 20633949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TODIM methods for landfill location selection.
Hanine M; Boutkhoum O; Tikniouine A; Agouti T
Springerplus; 2016; 5():501. PubMed ID: 27186465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An integrated fuzzy sustainable supplier evaluation and selection framework for green supply chains in reverse logistics.
Tavana M; Shaabani A; Santos-Arteaga FJ; Valaei N
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2021 Oct; 28(38):53953-53982. PubMed ID: 34043173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparing Analytic Hierarchy Process and Discrete-Choice Experiment to Elicit Patient Preferences for Treatment Characteristics in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
Danner M; Vennedey V; Hiligsmann M; Fauser S; Gross C; Stock S
Value Health; 2017 Sep; 20(8):1166-1173. PubMed ID: 28964450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation and selection of open-source EMR software packages based on integrated AHP and TOPSIS.
Zaidan AA; Zaidan BB; Al-Haiqi A; Kiah ML; Hussain M; Abdulnabi M
J Biomed Inform; 2015 Feb; 53():390-404. PubMed ID: 25483886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Hierarchical semi-numeric method for pairwise fuzzy group decision making.
Marimin M; Umano M; Hatono I; Tamura H
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern; 2002; 32(5):691-700. PubMed ID: 18244875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A Fuzzy-Based Decision Support Model for Selecting the Best Dialyser Flux in Haemodialysis.
Oztürk N; Tozan H
J Healthc Eng; 2015; 6(3):303-24. PubMed ID: 26753437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Transshipment site selection using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches under fuzzy environment.
Onüt S; Soner S
Waste Manag; 2008; 28(9):1552-9. PubMed ID: 17768038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Hybrid Fuzzy Decision Model for Evaluating MEMS and IC Integration Technologies.
Lee QY; Lee MX; Lee YC
Micromachines (Basel); 2021 Mar; 12(3):. PubMed ID: 33799935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Application of an integrated multi-criteria decision making AHP-TOPSIS methodology for ETL software selection.
Hanine M; Boutkhoum O; Tikniouine A; Agouti T
Springerplus; 2016; 5():263. PubMed ID: 27006872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to determine product usability: A proposed theoretical framework.
Zhou R; Chan AH
Work; 2017; 56(1):9-19. PubMed ID: 28035943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An Approach to Determining Attribute Weights Based on Integrating Preference Information on Attributes with Decision Matrix.
Zhang Q; Xiu H
Comput Intell Neurosci; 2018; 2018():4864517. PubMed ID: 30364056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Inter-basin water transfer planning with grey COPRAS and fuzzy COPRAS techniques: A case study in Iranian Central Plateau.
Roozbahani A; Ghased H; Hashemy Shahedany M
Sci Total Environ; 2020 Jul; 726():138499. PubMed ID: 32330745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Integrating multi-criteria evaluation techniques with geographic information systems for landfill site selection: a case study using ordered weighted average.
Gorsevski PV; Donevska KR; Mitrovski CD; Frizado JP
Waste Manag; 2012 Feb; 32(2):287-96. PubMed ID: 22030279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Using an innovative criteria weighting tool for stakeholders involvement to rank MSW facility sites with the AHP.
De Feo G; De Gisi S
Waste Manag; 2010 Nov; 30(11):2370-82. PubMed ID: 20444589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Market Competitiveness Evaluation of Mechanical Equipment with a Pairwise Comparisons Hierarchical Model.
Hou F
PLoS One; 2016; 11(1):e0146862. PubMed ID: 26783751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Application of q-rung orthopair fuzzy based SWARA-COPRAS model for municipal waste treatment technology selection.
Soni A; Das PK; Kumar S
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2023 Aug; 30(37):88111-88131. PubMed ID: 37434060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
