Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33117896›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2020

Evaluation of smart and sustainable cities through a hybrid MCDM approach based on ANP and TOPSIS technique.

Gokhan Ozkaya, Ceren Erdin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

2 authors.

Gokhan OzkayaIstanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, Quantitative Methods, Turkey.
Ceren ErdinYildiz Technical University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant efforts are being performed to make cities smarter and more sustainable. Therefore, there is a need to compare these efforts using evaluation frameworks. According to the literature review, the basic dimensions of smart cities are generally evaluated with the criteria of regional competitiveness, transportation, information and communication technology, economy, natural resources, human and social capital, quality of life and participation of citizens in the management of cities. In this paper, Analytical Network Process (ANP) is used to weight smart and sustainable city criteria. According to the results, while 'smart living' is the most important characteristic with a 35,459% priority, 'smart governance' is the last with 5,738%. The study covers 44 cities around the world and comparisons were made by TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution). According to the results, Tokyo, London and New York are in the top three in the overall ranking. But none of these cities is among the top five in terms of smart governance, mobility and environmental dimensions. According to the results obtained, the article provides some recommendations for the cities. These results aim to help cities understand their situation relative to other cities and to see areas where policymakers need to strengthen.

Indexed as

Analytic network process (ANP)BusinessEconomicsInnovative spiritMulti criteria decision making (MCDM)Quality of lifeSmart citySmart governanceSmart peopleSociologySustainable cityTOPSISTourism

Identifiers

PMID33117896
PMCPMC7581932

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.