ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support decision-making during health emergencies: a scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support decision-making during health emergencies: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The mismatch between the health needs of populations affected by emergencies and resources devoted to response is projected to further increase. Making the response more effective is one of the solutions to meet the growing needs. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been successfully used to increase effectiveness in various fields by supporting decision-making. However, no review of its application to all-hazard health emergencies has been done to date. Methods: A review of peer-reviewed English-language articles published since 2004 was conducted in May 2024 using Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases. The review focused on the empirical application of MCDA to support decision-making during health emergencies. The review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using summary statistics and qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. Results: Seventy-one articles were included after screening. The articles described the MCDA application to support a variety of decision problems related to health emergency management. However, the technique was mostly applied to infectious hazards management and only seldom to other hazards. The review also found a lack of standardized methodology for identifying alternatives and criteria, weighting, computation of model output, methods of dealing with uncertainty, and stakeholder engagement. Conclusion: The review provides an overview of the current use of the MCDA approach to support decision-making in health emergency management and informs areas of future development. The review emphasizes that while MCDA is already used for infectious hazards, it is underutilized for other types of health emergencies. Developing tailored MCDA approaches for health emergencies, including defining evaluation criteria and stakeholder engagement, may improve uptake of the technique and benefit the efforts to meet the growing health needs of the population affected by emergencies, https://osf.io/6kd5s/.
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.