ArticleScientific reports2024
CRITID: enhancing CRITIC with advanced independence testing for robust multi-criteria decision-making.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Digital Transformation in Chinese Hospitals: Development and Validation of a Digital Maturity Evaluation Framework.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Assessment of coastal bedrock groundwater quality in Jiaodong Peninsula via extension cloud model and resampling strategy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multi-criteria spatial assessment of urban open spaces for promoting physical activity and spatial justice: a case study of Tehran metropolitan.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An integrated neutrosophic Z-numbers based CRITIC-EDAS decision model for smart solar panel evaluation in sustainable energy planning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A risk analysis method for potential failure modes in the lithium-ion battery assembly process based on optimized FMEA and DHHFLTS.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In multi-criteria decision-making and model evaluation, determining the weight of criteria is crucial. With the rapid development of information technology and the advent of the big data era, the need for complex problem analysis and decision-making has intensified. Traditional CRiteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) methods rely on Pearson correlation, which may not adequately address nonlinearity in some scenarios. This study aims to refine the CRITIC method to better accommodate nonlinear relationships and enhance its robustness. We have developed a novel method named CRiteria Importance Through Intercriteria Dependence (CRITID), which leverages cutting-edge independence testing methods such as distance correlation among others. This approach enhances the assessment of intercriteria relationships. Upon application across diverse data distributions, the CRITID method has demonstrated enhanced rationality and robustness relative to the traditional CRITIC method. These improvements significantly benefit multi-criteria decision-making and model evaluation, providing a more accurate and dependable framework for analyzing complex datasets.
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.