Evaluation of the Performance of Covid-19 Vaccines by F-DEMATEL and RAFSI Methods

Year 2022, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 126 - 141, 20.10.2022

Ahmet Turan Demir

Abstract

In this study, a new decision-making model based on Fuzzy The Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (F-DEMATEL) technique, which evaluates many vaccines with Ranking of Alternatives through Functional mapping of criterion sub-intervals into a Single Interval (RAFSI) methods using multiple criteria to support decision making, is proposed. To demonstrate the usefulness of the suggested methodology, five COVID-19 vaccines (BioNTech, Moderna, Sputnik V, AstraZeneca, Sinovac) were chosen for a case study. Each vaccine was compared with others according to seven criteria (the effectiveness rate of vaccines, the storage time of vaccines, the cold chain of vaccines, the number of doses administered, the price of double doses, the protection of vaccines, side effects of vaccines) and all criteria were compared with both qualitative and quantitative data to calculate relative weights. Fuzzy Set Theory was applied to model the problem. The criteria were weighted with the F-DEMATEL approach. As a result of the application made with F-DEMATEL, the criteria used in the evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines showed that the protection feature of the vaccines was the most important criterion with a weight of 0,191, while the storage time of the vaccines was the least important criterion with a weight of 0,100. The BioNTech vaccine had the maximum performance, with a value of 0,6487, according to the criteria employed in the suggested model, while AstraZeneca had the lowest performance, with a value of 0,3752 as a consequence of the application with RAFSI.

Keywords

COVID-19 vaccine, MCDM, F-DEMATEL, RAFSI

Covıd-19 Aşılarının Performansının F-DEMATEL ve RAFSI Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, Bulanık Karar Verme Deneme ve Değerlendirme Laboratuvarı (F-DEMATEL) tekniğine dayalı, karar vermeyi desteklemek için çoklu kriterler kullanarak birçok aşıyı Kriter alt aralıklarının Tek Bir Aralığa İşlevsel Eşlenmesi Yoluyla Alternatiflerin Sıralanması (RAFSI) yöntemleri ile değerlendiren yeni bir karar verme modeli önerilmiştir. Önerilen metodolojinin yararlılığını göstermek için, bir vaka çalışması için beş COVID-19 aşısı (BioNTech, Moderna, Sputnik V, AstraZeneca, Sinovac) seçildi. Her aşı yedi kritere (aşıların etkililik oranı, aşıların saklanma süreleri, aşılara ait soğuk zincir, uygulanan doz sayısı, çift doz fiyatı, aşıların koruyuculuk özelliği, aşıların yan etkileri) göre diğerleriyle karşılaştırıldı ve nispi ağırlıkları hesaplamak için tüm kriterler hem nitel hem de nicel verilerle karşılaştırıldı. Kriterler F-DEMATEL yaklaşımı ile ağırlıklandırılmıştır. F-DEMATEL ile yapılan uygulama sonucunda COVID-19 aşılarının değerlendirilmesinde kullanılan kriterler, aşıların korunma özelliğinin 0,191 ağırlıkla en önemli kriter olduğunu, aşıların saklanma süresinin ise 0,100 ağırlıkla en az önemli kriter olduğunu göstermiştir. BioNTech aşısı, önerilen modelde kullanılan kriterlere göre 0,6487 değeri ile maksimum performansa sahipken, AstraZeneca RAFSI ile yapılan uygulama sonucunda 0,3752 değeri ile en düşük performansa sahip olmuştur.

Keywords

COVID-19 aşısı, MCDM, F-DEMATEL, RAFSI

References

• Abdelwahab, S.F., Issa, U.H. & Ashour, H.M. (2021). A Novel Vaccine Selection Decision-Making Model (VSDMM) for COVID-19. Vaccines, 9(7), 718.
• Alemdar, K.D., Kaya, Ö., Çodur, M.Y., Campisi, T. & Tesoriere, G. (2021). Accessibility of Vaccination Centers in COVID-19 Outbreak Control: A GIS-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(10), 708.
• Chen, C.-T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1-9.
• Dai, X., Xiong, Y., Li, N. & Jian, C. 2019. Vaccine Types. Vaccines-the History and Future. pp 1-9.
• Demir, G. (2021a). Orta ve Doğu Avrupa Ülkelerinin Finansal Performanslarının Bulanık DEMATEL ce CoCoSo Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi. XXI. Uluslararası Ekonometri, Yöneylem Araştırması, İstatistik
• Sempozyumu, Çanakkale, Türkiye, 8-10 Eylül 2021, cilt.1, ss.303-324
• Demir, G. (2021b). Özel Sermayeli Mevduat Bankalarında Performans Analizi: SWARA-RAFSI Bütünleşik Model Uygulaması. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 35 (4), 1359-1382.
• Forestal, R.L. & Pi, S.M. (2022). A hybrid approach based on ELECTRE III‐genetic algorithm and TOPSIS method for selection of optimal COVID‐19 vaccines. Journal of Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, 29(1-2), 80-91.
• Forni, G. & Mantovani, A. 2021. COVID-19 vaccines: where we stand and challenges ahead. Cell Death & Differentiation, 28(2), 626-639.
• Gao, Q., Bao, L., Mao, H et al. 2020. Development of an inactivated vaccine candidate for SARS-CoV-2. Science, 369(6499), 77-81.
• Garai, T. & Garg, H. (2022). Multi-criteria decision making of COVID-19 vaccines (in India) based on ranking interpreter technique under single-valued bipolar neutrosophic environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 208, 118160.
• Hatmal, M.M., Alshaer, W., Al-Hatamleh, M.A.I et al. 2020. Comprehensive Structural and Molecular Comparison of Spike Proteins of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, and Their Interactions with ACE2. Cells, 9(12), 2638.
• Hezam, I.M., Nayeem, M.K., Foul, A. & Alrasheedi, A.F. (2021). COVID-19 Vaccine: a neutrosophic MCDM approach for determining the priority groups. Results Phys. 20:103654.
• Demir│International Journal of Economic and Adminıstrative Academic Research, 2(2), 2022, 126-141 141
• Kashte, S., Gulbake, A., El-Amin III, S.F. & Gupta, A. 2021. COVID-19 vaccines: rapid development, implications, challenges and future prospects. Human Cell, 34(3), 711-733.
• Khuroo, M.S., Khuroo, M., Khuroo, M.S., Sofi, A.A. & Khuroo, N.S. 2020. COVID-19 vaccines: A race against time in the middle of death and devastation! Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hepatology.
• Li, C.W. & Tzeng, G.H. (2009). Identification of A Threshold Value for The DEMATEL Method Using The Maximum Mean Entropy Algorithm to Find Critical Services Provided by A Semiconductor Intellectual Property Mall. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6): 9891-9898.
• Li, R.J. (1999). Fuzzy Method in Group Decision Making. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 38(1): 91-101.
• Lin, C.J. & Wu, W.W. (2008). A Causal Analytical Method For Group Decision-Making Under Fuzzy Environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(1): 205-213.
• Rothan, H.A. & Byrareddy, S.N. 2020. The epidemiology and pathogenesis of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Journal of Autoimmunity, 109, 102433.
• Seyed-Hosseini, S.M., Safaei, N. & Asgharpour, M.J. (2006). Reprioritization of Failures in A System Failure Mode and Effects Analysis by Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Technique. Reliability
• Engineering and System Safety, 91(8): 872-881.
• Tseng, M.L. & Lin, Y.H. (2008). Application of Fuzzy DEMATEL to Develop A Cause And Effect Model Of Municipal Solid Waste. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 1(2): 158-171.
• Wu W. W. (2008). Choosing Knowledge Management Strategies by Using A Combined ANP and DEMATEL Approach. Expert Systems With Applications, 35(3): 828-835.
• Yazıcı, E., Üner, S.İ., Demir, A., Dinler, S. & Alakaş, H.M. (2022). Evaluation of supply sustainability of vaccine alternatives with multi-criteria decision-making methods. Health Planning and Management, 37(4), 2421-2444.
• Zadeh L.A. (1965). Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control, 8, 338–353.
• Žižović, M., Pamučar, D., Albijanić, M., Chatterjee, P. & Pribićević, I. (2020). Eliminating rank reversal problem using a new multi-attribute model-the RAFSI method. Mathematics 8(6): 1015.