Action selection in risk assessment with fuzzy Fine–Kinney-based AHP-TOPSIS approach: a case study in gas plant

Dogan, Bahar; Oturakci, Murat; Dağsuyu, Cansu

doi:10.1007/s11356-022-20498-2

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In terms of research on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods, AHP has been widely used in combination with other commonly used MCDM method, such as TOPSIS, which is the technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution [14]. The TOPSIS method converts multiple criteria into comprehensive indicators, and determines the suitable alternative that is closest to positive ideal solutions, and away from the negative ideal solutions [17,18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative evaluation the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on AHP weighted TOPSIS method

Zou,

Zhong,

Zou

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Adopts Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Situation (TOPSIS) to assess and rank different indicators of evaluation index and evaluate the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in patients with metastatic CRC. Methods The evaluation criteria for the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen was established with reference to the dispensatory and application guidelines by using AHP weight, and TOPSIS method was adopts to retrospectively analyze and evaluate the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in 176 cases in the medical records of our hospital from July to December 2022. Results Established evaluation criteria included 3 primary indexes (indication, medication process, management indicator) and 18 secondary parameters. Chemotherapy regimens selection, therapeutic evaluation and discontinuation of drug indications ranked top 3 secondary parameters (relative weight coefficient were 0.08352, 0.06257, 0.06217, respectively). The primary inappropriate types and scores of FOLFOX regimen were preconditioning, dose selection and therapeutic evaluation (deducted scores were 429.44, 416.97, 306.59 respectively). Among 176 cases, 49 cases (27.84%) had a relative proximity (Ci) equal to 100%, 87 cases (49.43%) 100%-80%, 29 cases (16.48%) 80%-60% and 11 cases (6.25%) below to 60%. The major problems were vomiting risk was not assessed (16.13%), insufficient dose of cytotoxic agents (15.66%) and treatment effects were not evaluated according to WHO standards (11.52%). Conclusions The evaluation criteria of the rationality of clinical application of FOLFOX regimen were established by AHP-TOPSIS method. The evaluation results obtained by this method were quantifiable, scientific and credible. The phenomenon of irrational use of these drugs in our hospital is relatively common, and the management should be strengthened in clinical application. Implications for cancer survivors AHP weighted TOPSIS method can quantitatively evaluate the rationality of anti-cancer drugs by integrating multiple indicators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative evaluation the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on AHP weighted TOPSIS method

Zou,

Zhong,

Zou

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FKM, on the other hand, focuses on the probability of unwanted events occurring and the magnitude of the consequences if they occur. In this method, estimating probabilities and determining frequencies often require a difficult and time-consuming process (Dogan, et al, 2022). This can adversely affect risk assessment and make it challenging to determine acceptable risk levels (Birgören, 2017).…”

Section: Fine-kinney Methods (Fkm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Methods in Ağrı Cement Factory: Fine-Kinney vs. 3T Approach

İnanlı,

Özbakır

2024

Karadeniz Fen Bilimleri Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Occupational health and safety is essential to protect, maintain and improve the physical, psychological and social well-being of employees and to prevent harmful factors. One way to prevent occupational hazards is to identify them in the workplace. Therefore, providing information to assist in making the necessary decisions to reduce occupational hazards, and conducting hazard identification and risk assessment will contribute significantly. In this study, the risks identified at Ağrı Cement Factory were classified using the Fine-Kinney method and the 3T risk assessment method, and the results were compared. The 3T method is superior to the Fine-Kinney method because of its modular structure. The high risks that require immediate action in the Fine-Kinney method appear to be prioritized similarly in the 3T method as well. However, in the Fine-Kinney method, significant, possible, and risks are considered among the top 3 priority risks, while in the 3T method, they are considered among the top 2 priority risks. It has been observed that a risk assessment utilizing the Fine-Kinney method will be successful if continuously updated. Difficulty in selecting the probability component has led to elevating risk values in the Fine-Kinney risk assessments by selecting a higher level of risk. Although both methods exhibit different approaches, the 3T methodology has been understood to provide a comprehensive perspective by considering risk in terms of threat, performance, and harm. This approach has addressed different dimensions to understand the origins, impacts, and consequences of risks. On the other hand, the Fine-Kinney Risk Assessment Method, relying on weighting and scoring factors specific to project characteristics and factors, has been reported to evaluate risk in a more analytical manner. It has been concluded that this methodology will be successful in calculating risk scores by considering specific project characteristics and risk profiles.

show abstract

“…Using the severity calculation, cases with a mild, harmless, or insignificant result received a score of one, cases with a minor loss of labor and minor damage received a score of three, cases with a loss of labor received a score of 7, cases with disabilities or limb losses received a score of 15, death or total disability received a score of 40, and multiple deaths received a score of 100. Using the risk index obtained, an acceptable risk was defined as smaller than 20, less than 70 as definite risk, 70-200 as significant risk, 200-400 as high risk, and more than 400 as very high risk (10).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Evaluation of Occupational Accidents in a Hospital Setting: Insights from L-Type Matrix and Fine-Kinney Risk Assessment Methods

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this study was to comprehensively evaluate occupational accidents in a hospital setting using the L-Type matrix and Fine-Kinney risk assessment methods. The aim was to assess the frequency, severity, and associated risks of different types of accidents. Methods: This single-center observational study analyzed occupational injuries that occurred to hospital employees between January 2018 and December 2022 in Arnavutköy State Hospital. Data were obtained from hospital records using a hospital information management system. Demographic characteristics, accident types, previous accident history, incapacity reports, L-Type matrix scores, and Fine-Kinney method scores were recorded. Risk scores were categorized based on predefined criteria. Results: The study included 249 occupational accidents, with a mean age of 30.94±9.69 years. Needle stick injuries in the hand were the most common type of accident (72.7%), followed by falls and bumps (16.1%). The L-Type matrix assessment showed that 90% of accidents were mild, and none were severe. According to the Fine-Kinney method, 0.8% of accidents were in the very high-risk group. Multiple accidents were observed among 23.7% of employees, and 11.6% resulted in work disability reports. Conclusion: Occupational accidents pose a significant risk to the safety and well-being of healthcare workers in hospitals. Needle stick injuries and falls or collisions were the most prevalent accidents. The use of risk assessment methods such as the L-Type matrix and Fine-Kinney approach allows for a comprehensive evaluation of occupational risks.

show abstract

Action selection in risk assessment with fuzzy Fine–Kinney-based AHP-TOPSIS approach: a case study in gas plant

Cited by 12 publications

References 47 publications

Quantitative evaluation the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on AHP weighted TOPSIS method

Quantitative evaluation the rationality of the use of FOLFOX regimen in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on AHP weighted TOPSIS method

Comparative Analysis of Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Methods in Ağrı Cement Factory: Fine-Kinney vs. 3T Approach

Comprehensive Evaluation of Occupational Accidents in a Hospital Setting: Insights from L-Type Matrix and Fine-Kinney Risk Assessment Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About