ArticleScientific reports2021
The optimal emergency decision-making method with incomplete probabilistic information.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers and Facilitators to Adherence to Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Among Coronary Artery Disease Patients: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- A Closed-Loop Method for Multiperiod Intelligent Information Processing with Cost Constraints under the Fuzzy Environment.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- High-Discrimination Comparison Algorithm for the Comprehensive Evaluation of Innovation Ability in Colleges and Universities under Uncertain Information.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emergencies often occur irregularly, such as infectious diseases, earthquakes, wars, floods, the diffusion and leakage of chemically toxic and harmful substances, etc. These emergencies can bring huge disasters to people, even worse, the time left for people to make critical decisions is usually very limited. When an emergency occurs, the most important thing for people is to make reasonable decisions as soon as possible to deal with the current problems, otherwise, the situation may deteriorate further. The paper proposes an emergency decision-making algorithm under the constraints of the limited time and incomplete information, the research is mainly carried out from the following aspects, firstly, we use the data structure of the hesitant fuzzy probabilistic linguistic set to collect the basic data after careful comparison, which has three advantages, (1) considering the hesitation in the decision-making process, each evaluation information is allowed to contain multiple values instead of just one value; (2) each evaluation value is followed by a probability value, which further describes the details of the evaluation information; (3) the data structure allows some probability information to be unknown, which effectively expands the application scope of the algorithm. Secondly, the maximization gap model is proposed to calculate unknown parameters, the model can distinguish alternatives with small differences. Thirdly, all the evaluation information will be aggregated by the dynamic hesitant probability fuzzy weighted arithmetic operator. Subsequently, an instance is given to illustrate the effectiveness and the accuracy of the algorithm proposed in the paper. Finally, the advantages of the proposed algorithm are further demonstrated by comparing it with other outstanding algorithms. The main contribution of the paper is that we propose the maximization gap model to obtain the unknown parameters, which can effectively and accurately distinguish alternatives with small differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.