A novel Fractional fuzzy approach for multi-criteria decision-making in medical waste management.

IF 3.8 2区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Muhammad Amad Sarwar, Yuezheng Gong, Sarah A Alzakari, Amel Ali Alhussan
{"title":"A novel Fractional fuzzy approach for multi-criteria decision-making in medical waste management.","authors":"Muhammad Amad Sarwar, Yuezheng Gong, Sarah A Alzakari, Amel Ali Alhussan","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-06184-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urban populations, coupled with increased healthcare service usage, highlight the need for safe and sustainable medical waste management (MWM). Choosing the right technology for MWM is a crucial challenge for decision-makers aiming to protect public health. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques are often used to address uncertainty and complexity inherent in such decisions. MCDM techniques based on traditional fuzzy sets (such as spherical and t-spherical fuzzy sets) leave significant membership value. In this response, a f, g, h-fractional fuzzy set (f, g, h-FrFS) based MCDM model is introduced. This study introduces the f, g, h-FrFS based Hamming and normalized Hamming distances. Additionally, we propose an improved Criteria Importance through Inter-Criteria Correlation (CRITIC) method to assess criteria weights and a novel distance-based Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method to evaluate and rank MWM technologies. To test the robustness of the proposed approach, a sensitivity analysis is conducted, demonstrating the stability of the model under varying conditions. The result is the development of a comprehensive MCDM framework, referred to as f, g, h-FrF-CRITIC-TOPSIS, which incorporates relevant criteria for evaluating MWM technologies. The effectiveness of this framework is further validated through a comparative study. The results align with the actual situation and offer valuable insights into the implementation of suitable treatment technologies for MWM. This methodology proves to be highly effective in addressing the complex decision-making challenges associated with MWM, particularly in uncertain environments. Ultimately, this technique offers significant value for policymakers and organizations involved in medical systems. In medical premises, MWM is complicated, so this tool can assist them in navigating the complexities.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"23999"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-06184-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Urban populations, coupled with increased healthcare service usage, highlight the need for safe and sustainable medical waste management (MWM). Choosing the right technology for MWM is a crucial challenge for decision-makers aiming to protect public health. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques are often used to address uncertainty and complexity inherent in such decisions. MCDM techniques based on traditional fuzzy sets (such as spherical and t-spherical fuzzy sets) leave significant membership value. In this response, a f, g, h-fractional fuzzy set (f, g, h-FrFS) based MCDM model is introduced. This study introduces the f, g, h-FrFS based Hamming and normalized Hamming distances. Additionally, we propose an improved Criteria Importance through Inter-Criteria Correlation (CRITIC) method to assess criteria weights and a novel distance-based Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method to evaluate and rank MWM technologies. To test the robustness of the proposed approach, a sensitivity analysis is conducted, demonstrating the stability of the model under varying conditions. The result is the development of a comprehensive MCDM framework, referred to as f, g, h-FrF-CRITIC-TOPSIS, which incorporates relevant criteria for evaluating MWM technologies. The effectiveness of this framework is further validated through a comparative study. The results align with the actual situation and offer valuable insights into the implementation of suitable treatment technologies for MWM. This methodology proves to be highly effective in addressing the complex decision-making challenges associated with MWM, particularly in uncertain environments. Ultimately, this technique offers significant value for policymakers and organizations involved in medical systems. In medical premises, MWM is complicated, so this tool can assist them in navigating the complexities.

医疗废物管理多准则决策的分式模糊新方法。
城市人口,加上医疗保健服务使用量的增加,凸显了安全、可持续的医疗废物管理的必要性。为MWM选择正确的技术是旨在保护公众健康的决策者面临的一项关键挑战。多准则决策(MCDM)技术通常用于解决此类决策中固有的不确定性和复杂性。基于传统模糊集(如球面模糊集和t球面模糊集)的MCDM技术留下了显著的隶属度值。在此响应中,引入了一个基于f, g, h分数模糊集(f, g, h-FrFS)的MCDM模型。本文介绍了基于f、g、h-FrFS的汉明距离和归一化汉明距离。此外,我们提出了一种改进的标准重要性,通过标准间相关性(批评家)方法来评估标准权重,并提出了一种新的基于距离的顺序偏好技术,通过理想解相似性(TOPSIS)方法来评估和排序MWM技术。为了测试所提出的方法的鲁棒性,进行了灵敏度分析,证明了模型在不同条件下的稳定性。结果是开发了一个综合的MCDM框架,称为f, g, h- frf - critical - topsis,其中包含了评估MWM技术的相关标准。通过对比研究进一步验证了该框架的有效性。研究结果与实际情况相吻合,为实施合适的水处理技术提供了有价值的见解。事实证明,这种方法在解决与MWM相关的复杂决策挑战方面非常有效,特别是在不确定的环境中。最终,这项技术为参与医疗系统的决策者和组织提供了重要的价值。在医疗场所,MWM是复杂的,因此该工具可以帮助他们导航复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Scientific Reports
Scientific Reports Natural Science Disciplines-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
19567
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections. Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021). •Engineering Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live. •Physical sciences Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics. •Earth and environmental sciences Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems. •Biological sciences Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants. •Health sciences The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信