Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40593107›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Internal control risk assessment using interval valued spherical fuzzy CRITIC EDAS.

Fatih Sahin, Akin Menekse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Fatih SahinDepartment of Software Engineering, Istanbul Topkapi University, 34087, Istanbul, Turkey.
Akin MenekseIstanbul Technical University, 34467, Istanbul, Turkey. menekse18@itu.edu.tr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internal control is a set of procedures, policies, and processes established within an organization with the aim of reasonably ensuring the accomplishment of the organization's objectives. As businesses confront a more intricate and ever-changing environment, the importance of reliable methodologies capable of effectively dealing with uncertainties and ambiguities becomes crucial. Given the potential complexity arising from numerous criteria, candidates, and the inherent subjectivity introduced by multiple decision experts participating in the process, evaluating internal control risk can be conceptualized as a problem within fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). Criteria Importance Through Inter-criteria Correlation (CRITIC) integrated Evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) methodology is developed for addressing internal control risk assessment. The proposed methodology is presented in an interval-valued spherical fuzzy environment for modeling the uncertainty of the decision-making process in a comprehensive manner. Internal control evaluation criteria are obtained from the enterprise risk management framework presented by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The study contributes significantly by prioritizing internal control levels, conducting sensitivity analyses, and providing a comparative analysis with contemporary approaches. The paper structures a comprehensive review of literature, outlines mathematical operations of interval-valued spherical fuzzy sets, details the proposed methodology, and presents application results with theoretical and practical implications. The manuscript concludes by acknowledging limitations and suggesting avenues for future research, offering a valuable resource for professionals and researchers in the field of internal control and audit.

Indexed as

COSOCRITICEDASInternal controlSpherical fuzzy sets

Identifiers

PMID40593107
PMCPMC12215536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.