Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39885252›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A two-stage model of the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and the fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique to prioritize sustainable sanitation services under uncertainty.

Shaher Zyoud, Siwar M Omair, Susan A Jarrad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Shaher ZyoudDepartment of Civil Engineering & Sustainable Structures, Technical University (Kadoorie), Jaffa Street, P.O. Box (7), Tulkarem, Palestine. shaher.zyoud@ptuk.edu.ps.
Siwar M OmairDepartment of Civil Engineering & Sustainable Structures, Technical University (Kadoorie), Jaffa Street, P.O. Box (7), Tulkarem, Palestine.
Susan A JarradDepartment of Civil Engineering & Sustainable Structures, Technical University (Kadoorie), Jaffa Street, P.O. Box (7), Tulkarem, Palestine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which strive to ensure comprehensive access to fundamental water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services, it is extremely imperative to prioritize communities in need and still disadvantaged. Moreover, tackling the worldwide sanitation crisis entails advancing the development of productive and sustainable sanitation systems and infrastructure. Sanitation planning is a multidimensional exercise encompassing multiple dimensions, stakeholders, and strategies, typically with conflicting objectives. Poor planning, funding obstacles, stakeholder priorities, climatic changes, growing populations, system constraints, and user engagement all complicate the entire process. Intelligent strategic decision-making is crucial, particularly for resource-constrained economies. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) models offer opportunities to figure out and resolve such conflicts, while also optimizing prioritization and policymaking. These models assist with considering trade-offs, data uncertainty, and arriving at decisions by considering technical, economic, social, and environmental sustainability. In the present work, a two-stage integrated model of the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and the Fuzzy Synthetic Evaluation Technique (FSET) was developed, accompanied by a sensitivity analysis, yielding an assessment index designated as the Sanitation Priority Index (SPI). This index is particularly applicable in prioritizing and categorizing communities in need of sanitation infrastructure (e.g., wastewater collection systems and treatment plants), considering competition over scarce resources, reliance on third-party funds, and sustainability factors. The decision-making problem was designed as a hierarchical structure that integrates all problem elements and specifies the key criteria contributing to the SPI. Fuzzy set theory handles data uncertainty, with FAHP evaluating criteria significance in a group decision-making context and FSET designing criteria membership functions. Field data on criteria contributing to the SPI is transformed into fuzzy intervals, synthesized, and defuzzified to derive the SPI at community level. The model's robustness is examined using sensitivity analysis as it is applied to several Palestinian communities lacking sanitation infrastructure. The outcomes show that the demographic criterion has the major impact on the SPI (20.38%), followed by water consumption (16.76%) and wastewater reuse potential (15.40%). Environmental risks account for 12.40%, utilities' competency (11.5%), and industrial wastes risks (8.72%). The socioeconomic context is valued at 5.10%, geographical constraints at 4.51%, and license constraints at 4.8%. Out of the 25 communities investigated, five exhibited SPI values surpassing 60.0%. Eleven communities possessed SPI values between 50.0% and 60.0%, and nine achieved SPI values ranging from 40.0 to 50.0%. The sensitivity analysis application reveals almost complete stability in prioritizing communities. Introducing this model into relevant bodies' sanitation management practices and planning strategies holds the potential to significantly boost sustainable sanitation services as well as the performance of water and wastewater utilities. It further enables the incorporation of additional criteria and the interests of more stakeholders.

Indexed as

Decision-makingFuzzy set theoryReliabilitySanitation Priority IndexSensitivity analysisSustainability

Identifiers

PMID39885252
PMCPMC11782565

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.