ArticleMethodsX2023
An investigation to offer conclusive recommendations on suitable benefit/cost criteria-based normalization methods for TOPSIS.
Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is a popular multi-criteria decision-making method that ranks the available alternatives by examining the ideal-positive and ideal-negative solutions for each decision criterion. The first step of using TOPSIS is to normalize the presence of incommensurable data in the decision matrix. There are several normalization methods, and the choice of these methods does affect TOPSIS results. As such, some efforts were made in the past to compare and recommend suitable normalization methods for TOPSIS. However, such studies merely compared a limited collection of normalization methods or used a noncomprehensive procedure to evaluate each method's suitability, leading to equivocal recommendations. This study, therefore, employed an alternate, comprehensive procedure to evaluate and recommend suitable benefit/cost criteria-based normalization methods for TOPSIS (out of ten methods extracted from past literature). The procedure was devised based on three evaluation metrics: the average Spearman's rank correlation, average Pearson correlation, and standard deviation metrics, combined with the Borda count technique.•The first study examined the suitability of ten benefit/cost criteria-based normalization methods over TOPSIS.•Users should combine the sum-based method and vector method into the TOPSIS application for safer decision-making.•The maximum method (version I) or Jüttler's-Körth's method has an identical effect on TOPSIS results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.