Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36540295›Full record

ArticleSocio-economic planning sciences2023

Multi-criteria evaluation of medical waste management process under intuitionistic fuzzy environment: A case study on hospitals in Turkey.

Sefa Çelik, İskender Peker, A Cansu Gök-Kısa, Gülçin Büyüközkan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Socio-economic planning sciences, 2023. 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. Forecasting medical waste in Istanbul using a novel nonlinear grey Bernoulli model optimized by firefly algorithm.Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA · 2025
    Article
  4. Effective waste management in service industry: Fuzzy-based modelling approach for strategic decision-making.Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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.

Sefa ÇelikAtatürk University, Department of Business Administration, Erzurum, Turkey.
İskender PekerGumushane University, Department of Business Administration, Gümüşhane, Turkey.
A Cansu Gök-KısaHitit University, Department of International Trade and Logistics, Çorum, Turkey.
Gülçin BüyüközkanGalatasaray University, Department of Industrial Engineering, İstanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Waste management has come to the fore in the whole world with the increasing impact of the Covid-19 pandemic along with concerns about human health, environmental threats, and socio-economic factors, etc. Medical waste is one of the waste types that need special management processes including particularly collection, storage, separation, and disposal. Healthcare activities create a great amount of medical waste deriving from the hospitals. This study aims to determine the hospital that carries out medical waste management in the most effective way in Erzurum, Turkey. To handle intense uncertainty in the evaluation process, the case is analyzed by Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (IFMCDM) methods. The present study contributes to the literature by focusing on a real case problem under IF environment in a Group Decision-Making (GDM) framework. Additionally, based on the literature review and expert judgments, the evaluation criteria relevant to the case are defined in this paper. To this end, a four-phased integrated methodology that involves Intuitionistic Fuzzy Weighted Averaging (IFWA), IF Analytical Hierarchy Process (IFAHP), IF Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (IFTOPSIS) and One-Dimensional Sensitivity Analysis, is conducted. Firstly, IFWA is aimed to express the significance levels of decision makers (DMs) based on their knowledge, qualifications and experiences. Secondly, IFAHP is used to calculate the importance weights of the decision criteria and IFTOPSIS is preferred to rank the available hospitals. Then, sensitivity analysis is employed to display robustness. According to the results, the most important criteria are Qualified personnel, Health institution infrastructure, and Control of waste, respectively and the most efficient hospital is determined.

Indexed as

GDMIFAHPIFMCDMIFTOPSISMedical waste management

Identifiers

PMID36540295
PMCPMC9754754

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.