Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36090224›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2022

A novel multi-criteria decision-making approach for prioritization of elective surgeries through formulation of "weighted MeNTS scoring system".

Hassan Sikandar Rana, Muhammad Umer, Uzma Hassan, Umer Asgher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors.

Hassan Sikandar RanaDepartment of Business & Engineering Management, Sir Syed CASE Institute of Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Muhammad UmerDepartment of Business & Engineering Management, Sir Syed CASE Institute of Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Uzma HassanNUMS Department of Public Health, National University of Medical Sciences, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Umer AsgherDepartment of Robotics and Artificial Intelligence (AI), School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (SMME), National University of Science and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Publicly funded healthcare system has long non-manageable elective surgery waiting lists due to the non-existence of systematic mathematical modelling that can assess the relative priority of patients on elective surgery waiting lists thus denying the provision of surgical support to the patients with higher urgency. Mostly the patients of general surgery are entertain with highly subjective "time-honoured" methods that are inadequate to measure and compare the urgency of surgical procedure. Objective: A methodology of assigning priorities to patients on elective surgery waiting lists has been presented in this paper using weighted criteria objectives. The objectives hve been chosen and assigned weights based on hospital conditions, and in consultation with the surgeons in hospital in Pakistan. Methods: The proposed methodology presents two working contributions; first, a scoring mechanism based on MeNTS scoring system with weighted criterion that objectively translate the condition of patient prior to the surgical procedure; and second, a patient prioritization methodology to select patients for surgeries according to the corresponding scores. Detailed simulation results from actual patient data have been presented to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology, and its applicability and ease of use has been tested in real-time by surgeons while providing consultations to their patients. Results: The proposed methodology outperforms the traditional "first-come-first-serve" methodology as there was a 30% reduction in average waiting time in elective surgery waiting lists (from 4.246 to 2.956 days) with 103 (90%) of patients being entertained before or within the unprioritized surgeries time span, with 94 patients having surgery within 1 day of being on waiting list (an increase of 47 patients). Moreover, transparency and equity were also found in the adaptation of this strategy to prioritize the elective surgery patients. Conclusions: Prioritizing patients on elective surgery waiting lists is an important concern in surgical field. In most of the methodologies presented in earlier research, prioritization of patients for surgery is carried out subjectively. This study shows that the proposed technique has the potential to decrease the waiting times for patients on elective surgery waiting lists, as well as be presented as an objective methodology for preparing the elective surgery waiting lists to increase the transparency in waiting list.

Indexed as

Decision-makingElective surgery prioritizationMeNTS scoring systemSurgical decision-supportWaiting list management

Identifiers

PMID36090224
PMCPMC9449563

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.