These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35095335)

  • 1. Distance education tool selection using novel spherical fuzzy AHP EDAS.
    Menekşe A; Camgöz Akdağ H
    Soft comput; 2022; 26(4):1617-1635. PubMed ID: 35095335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A novel spherical fuzzy AHP-VIKOR methodology to determine serving petrol station selection during COVID-19 lockdown: A pilot study for İstanbul.
    Ayyildiz E; Taskin A
    Socioecon Plann Sci; 2022 Oct; 83():101345. PubMed ID: 35645424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A novel fuzzy framework for technology selection of sustainable wastewater treatment plants based on TODIM methodology in developing urban areas.
    Eseoglu G; Yapsakli K; Tozan H; Vayvay O
    Sci Rep; 2022 May; 12(1):8800. PubMed ID: 35614159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Investigation of the pharmaceutical warehouse locations under COVID-19-A case study for Duzce, Turkey.
    Erdogan M; Ayyildiz E
    Eng Appl Artif Intell; 2022 Nov; 116():105389. PubMed ID: 36059577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An extension of the best-worst method based on the spherical fuzzy sets for multi-criteria decision-making.
    Haseli G; Sheikh R; Ghoushchi SJ; Hajiaghaei-Keshteli M; Moslem S; Deveci M; Kadry S
    Granul Comput; 2024; 9(2):40. PubMed ID: 38585422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Spherical Fuzzy Logarithmic Aggregation Operators Based on Entropy and Their Application in Decision Support Systems.
    Jin Y; Ashraf S; Abdullah S
    Entropy (Basel); 2019 Jun; 21(7):. PubMed ID: 33267343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A model for emergency supply management under extended EDAS method and spherical hesitant fuzzy soft aggregation information.
    Ashraf S; Sohail M; Choudhary R; Naeem M; Chambashi G; Ali MR
    Sci Rep; 2023 May; 13(1):8375. PubMed ID: 37225781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Multiple criteria decision analytic methods in management with T-spherical fuzzy information.
    Chen TY
    Artif Intell Rev; 2023 Apr; ():1-71. PubMed ID: 37362889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. New method for emergency decision making with an integrated regret theory-EDAS method in 2-tuple spherical linguistic environment.
    Huang L; Mao LX; Chen Y; Liu HC
    Appl Intell (Dordr); 2022; 52(11):13296-13309. PubMed ID: 35250173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of Influenza Intervention Strategies in Turkey with Fuzzy AHP-VIKOR.
    Samanlioglu F
    J Healthc Eng; 2019; 2019():9486070. PubMed ID: 31827743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluating lecturer performance in Vietnam: An application of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods.
    Do QH; Tran VT; Tran TT
    Heliyon; 2024 Jun; 10(11):e30772. PubMed ID: 38933935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Additive manufacturing process selection for automotive industry using Pythagorean fuzzy CRITIC EDAS.
    Menekse A; Ertemel AV; Camgoz Akdag H; Gorener A
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(3):e0282676. PubMed ID: 36893100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Vaccine selection for COVID-19 by AHP and novel VIKOR hybrid approach with interval type-2 fuzzy sets.
    Meni Z B; Özkan EM
    Eng Appl Artif Intell; 2023 Mar; 119():105812. PubMed ID: 36624893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A novel spherical fuzzy AHP-integrated spherical WASPAS methodology for petrol station location selection problem: a real case study for İstanbul.
    Ayyildiz E; Taskin Gumus A
    Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2020 Oct; 27(29):36109-36120. PubMed ID: 32557027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Emergency decision support modeling for COVID-19 based on spherical fuzzy information.
    Ashraf S; Abdullah S
    Int J Intell Syst; 2020 Nov; 35(11):1601-1645. PubMed ID: 38607787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Identification and weighting of kidney allocation criteria: a novel multi-expert fuzzy method.
    Taherkhani N; Sepehri MM; Shafaghi S; Khatibi T
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2019 Sep; 19(1):182. PubMed ID: 31492132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.