ArticlePloS one2024
Prioritization of control measures in leakage scenario using Hendershot theory and FBWM-TOPSIS.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A decision-making model for blasting risk assessment in mines using FBWM and GRA methods.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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
Currently, there is increasing concern about the safety and leakage of process industries. Therefore, the present study aims to prioritize control measures before and after the leakage scenario by using the Hendershot theory and MCDM techniques. In this study, two proactive and reactive layers were selected before and after leakage of tanks, respectively. Then, criteria and alternatives were selected to perform fuzzy TOPSIS (FTOPSIS) and find the best alternative based on the literature review and Hendershot approach. The linear model of the fuzzy Best-Worst method (FBWM) was constructed and resolved using Lingo 17 software. Subsequently, criteria were assigned weights based on thorough calculations of the inconsistency rate. The weight of study experts was equal to 0.25. The results of FBWM showed that the reliability index with a weight of 0.3727 was ranked first and the inconsistency rate ([Formula: see text]) was calculated to be equal to 0.040. Inherent Safety Design (ISD) (0.899) and passive safety (0.767) also ranked first before and after tank leaks, respectively. Using the FBWM method leads to fewer pairwise comparisons and at the same time more stability. Although ISD and passive strategies are more valid and strict, elements of all strategies are necessary for a comprehensive process safety management program.
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.