Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36042813›Full record

ArticleGroup decision and negotiation2022

Probabilistic Approach to Multi-Stage Supplier Evaluation: Confidence Level Measurement in Ordinal Priority Approach.

Amin Mahmoudi, Saad Ahmed Javed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Group decision and negotiation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Amin MahmoudiDepartment of Construction and Real Estate, School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096 China.ORCID 0000-0001-7091-5044
Saad Ahmed JavedSchool of Business, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210044 China.ORCID 0000-0002-7916-7537

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A popular framework of the supplier selection process is usually characterized by problem definition, criteria formulation, supplier screening, and supplier selection. The literature review suggested limitations of this framework as it ignores the screening of criteria (beyond criteria weighing) and evaluators (buyers) and its inability to guide the supplier selection problems where a measure of confidence or trust is needed to confirm the reliability of the selected supplier. While extending de Boer's influential supplier selection framework, the current study argues that the supplier selection problem is not merely about ranking suppliers based on given criteria; instead, it involves evaluating criteria and evaluators as well. Guided by the theory of statistics and the Ordinal Priority Approach (OPA), the study pioneers a probabilistic approach of supplier evaluation and selection under incomplete information using a novel Confidence Level measure. The study suggests, the probability that a supplier shortlisted for selection is actually the optimum choice or not can be explained through a probability distribution, called W-distribution, therefore, confidently preventing the decision-makers from selecting the sub-optimum suppliers. The study presents a novel contribution to the theory of multiple-attribute decision-making through the OPA. The proposed approach can help build intelligent decision support systems to aid managers while providing them with early warning tools and suggestions to improve confidence in their selection.

Indexed as

Confidence level measurementIntelligent Decision support systemMulti-criteria decision analysisOrdinal priority approachSupplier selectionSupply chain management

Identifiers

PMID36042813
PMCPMC9409630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.