Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37906603›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

A multi-stage group decision making approach for sustainable supplier selection based on probabilistic linguistic time-ordered incentive operator.

Faming Zhang, Meixing Li, Zhaoqing Ye, Yufei Niu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Faming ZhangBusiness School, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2874-3901
Meixing LiBusiness School, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, China.
Zhaoqing YeCollege of Foreign Studies, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, China.
Yufei NiuSchool of Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study proposes a novel multi-stage multi-attribute group decision making method under a probabilistic linguistic environment considering the development state and trend of alternatives. First, the probabilistic linguistic term set (PLTS) is used by decision makers (DMs) to describe qualitative evaluation information. Subsequently, the weights of DMs for different attributes in different periods are determined by the credibility degree, which is combined with the hesitancy degree and the similarity degree. The evaluations of different DMs for alternatives and the evaluations of DMs' intentions to reward or punish are then aggregated. Later, the trend change level and the trend change stability of alternatives are measured through the means of reward and punishment incentives. Additionally, the probabilistic linguistic time-ordered incentive operator is proposed to aggregate the development state evaluation information and development trend evaluation information in different periods, and alternatives are prioritized by the extended TOPSIS method in the probabilistic linguistic environment. Finally, the practical use of the proposed decision framework is validated by using a sustainable supplier selection problem, and the effectiveness and the applicability of the framework are discussed through comparative analysis. The results show that the proposed approach can select suitable sustainable suppliers by considering their development state and trend in multiple stages.

Indexed as

Fuzzy LogicMotivationDecision MakingIntentionLinguistics

Identifiers

PMID37906603
PMCPMC10617744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.