Methods of Multi-Criteria Analysis in Technology Selection and Technology Assessment: A Systematic Literature Review

Adar, T., & Delice, E. K. (2019). New integrated approaches based on MC-HFLTS for healthcare waste treatment technology selection. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 32(4), 688-711. doi: 10.1108/JEIM-10-2018-0235 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Afgan, N. H., & Carvalho, M. G. (2002). Multi-criteria assessment of new and renewable energy power plants. Energy, 27(8), 739-755. doi: 10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00019-1 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Alao, M. A., Ayodele, T. R., Ogunjuyigbe, A. S. O., & Popoola, O. M. (2020). Multi-criteria decision based waste to energy technology selection using entropy-weighted TOPSIS technique: The case study of Lagos, Nigeria. Energy, 201, 117675. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117675 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Alao, M., Popoola, O. & Ayodele, T. (2022). A novel fuzzy integrated MCDM model for optimal selection of waste-to-energy-based-distributed generation under uncertainty: A case of the City of Cape Town, South Africa. Journal of Cleaner Production, 343, 130824. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130824 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Alcácer, V. & Cruz-Machado, V. (2019). Scanning the Industry 4.0: A Literature Review on Technologies for Manufacturing Systems. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 22. doi: 10.1016/j.jestch.2019.01.006 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ali, T., Nahian, A. J., & Ma, H. (2020). A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach to solve renewable energy technology selection problem for Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. Journal of Cleaner Production, 273, 122967. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122967 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ansari, R., Soltanzadeh, J., & Tavassoli, A. (2016). Technology selection between technology management and decision making: A case study from the Iranian automotive industry. International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, 16(4), 365-388. doi: 10.1504/IJATM.2016.081618 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Arslan, H. (2017). Current classification of multi criteria decision analysis methods and public sector implementations. In A. Murat, N. S., Pinarcioglu, & U. Orgen (Eds.), Current Debates in Public Finance, Public Administration, & Environmental Studies, (pp. 241–261). London, United Kingdom: IJOPEC Publication Limited. Search in Google Scholar

Aydiner, C., Sen, U., Koseoglu-Imer, D. Y., & Can Dogan, E. (2016). Hierarchical prioritization of innovative treatment systems for sustainable dairy wastewater management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 4605-4617. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.107 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Badia, X., et al. (2019). Patient involvement in reflective multicriteria decision analysis to assist decision making in oncology. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 35(1), 56-63. doi: 10.1017/S0266462318003641 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Baran-Kooiker, A., Czech, M., & Kooiker, C. (2018). Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Models in Health Technology Assessment of Orphan Drugs-a Systematic Literature Review. Next Steps in Methodology Development? Frontier in Public Health, 6, 287. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00287 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Baran-Kooiker, A., et al. (2019). Applicability of the evidem multi-criteria decision analysis framework for orphan drugs - results from a study in 7 Eurasian countries. Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica, 76(3), 581-598. doi: 10.32383/appdr/102681 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Belezas, F., & Daniel, A. (2022). Innovation in the sharing economy: A systematic literature review and research framework. Technovation, 102509. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102509 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Beyaz, H. F., & Yildirim, N. (2019). A Multi-criteria Decision-Making Model for Digital Transformation in Manufacturing: A Case Study from Automotive Supplier Industry. Proceedings of the International Symposium for Production Research 2019, 217-232. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-31343-2_19 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Blonda, A., Denier, Y., Huys, I., & Simoens, S. (2021). How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 12, 631527. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.631527 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Boudard, A., et al. (2016). Introduction of Health technology assessment at hospital [Mise en place de l’évaluation des technologies de santé en milieu hospitalier]. Annales Pharmaceutiques Francaises, 74(6), 473-481. doi: 10.1016/j.pharma.2016.03.001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Brans, J.P., Mareschal, B., & Vincke, P. (1984). PROMETHEE: A new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. Operational Research, 3, 477-490. Search in Google Scholar

Buyukozkan, G., & Gocer, F. (2019). Technology Selection for Logistics and Supply Chain Management by the Extended Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS. Proceedings - 2019 3rd International Conference on Data Science and Business Analytics, ICDSBA 2019, 9270219, 129-134. doi: 10.1109/ICDSBA48748.2019.00036 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Buyukozkan, G., Feyzioglu, O., & Gocer, F. (2018). Selection of sustainable urban transportation alternatives using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy Choquet integral approach. Transportation Research Part D-Transport and Environment, 58, 186-207. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2017.12.005 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Carver, S. J. (1991). Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems. Geographical Information Systems, 5(3), 321-339. doi: 10.1080/02693799108927858 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Castro, H. E., Moreno-Mattar, O., & Rivillas, J. C. (2018). HTA and MCDA solely or combined? The case of priority-setting in Colombia. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 6(1), 42. doi: 10.1186/s12962-020-00237-5 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Cavallaro, F., Zavadskas, E. K., Streimikiene, D., & Mardani, A. (2019). Assessment of concentrated solar power (CSP) technologies based on a modified intuitionistic fuzzy topsis and trigonometric entropy weights. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 140, 258-270. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.12.009 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Chadderton, C., et al. (2017). Decision support for selection of food waste technologies at military installations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 267-277. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.091 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Chan, F. T. S., Chan, M. H., & Tang, N. K. H. (2000). Evaluation methodologies for technology selection. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 107(1-3), 330-337. doi: 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00679-8 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Chodakowska, E., & Nazarko, J. (2020a). Rough Sets and DEA - a hybrid model for technology assessment. MATEC Web of Conferences, 312(2), 01006. doi: 10.1051/matecconf/202031201006 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Chodakowska, E., & Nazarko, J. (2020b). Hybrid rough set and data envelopment analysis approach to technology prioritisation. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 26(4), 1-22. doi: 10.3846/tede.2020.12538 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Choudhury, A. K., Shankar, R., & Tiwari, M. K. (2006). Consensus-based intelligent group decision-making model for the selection of advanced technology. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1776-1799. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ciani, L., Guidi, G., & Patrizi, G. (2022). Human reliability in railway engineering: Literature review and biblio-metric analysis of the last two decades. Safety Science, 151, 105755. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105755. Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Daniels, N. (2018). Combining A4R and MCDA in priority setting for health. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 169, 51. doi: 10.1186/s12962-018-0124-9 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Danner, M., et al. (2011). Integrating patients’ views into health technology assessment: Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a method to elicit patient preferences. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 27(4), 369-375. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000523 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Dat, L. Q., Chou, S. Y., Le, N. T., Wiguna, E., Yu, T. H. K., & Phuc, P. N. K. (2014). Selecting renewable energy technology via a fuzzy MCDM approach. In Moving Integrated Product Development to Service Clouds in the Global Economy. Proceedings of the 21st ISPE Inc. International Conference on Concurrent Engineering, CE 2014, p. 796-805. IOS Press. Search in Google Scholar

Delvenne, P., & Rosskamp, B. (2021). Cosmopolitan technology assessment? Lessons learned from attempts to address the deficit of technology assessment in Europe. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1-26. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2021.1988433 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

DiStefano, M. J., & Krubiner, C. B. (2020). Beyond the numbers: a critique of quantitative multi-criteria decision analysis. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 36(4), 292-296. doi: 10.1017/S0266462320000410 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N. & Lim, W. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133(C), 285-296. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Effatpanah, S. K., et al. (2022). Comparative Analysis of Five Widely-Used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Evaluate Clean Energy Technologies: A Case Study. Sustainability, 14(3), 1402. doi: 10.3390/su14031403 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Eilat, H., Golany, B., & Shtub, A. (2008). R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach. Omega-International Journal Of Management Science, 36(5), 895-912. doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2006.05.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Elahi, M., Alvandi, M., Valehzagharad, H. K., & Memarzade, M. (2011). Selecting the best ABS sensor technology using fuzzy MADM. Scientific Research and Essays, 6(31), 6487-6498. doi: 10.5897/SRE11.1079 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Fang, H., Wang, X., & Song, W. (2020). Technology selection for photovoltaic cell from sustainability perspective: An integrated approach, Renewable Energy, 153, 1029-1041. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.02.064 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Farghaly, M. N., et al. (2021). Recommendation for a Pilot MCDA Tool to Support the Value-Based Purchasing of Generic Medicines in the UAE. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 12, 680737. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.680737 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Fetanat, A., Tayebi, M., & Mofid, H. (2021). Water-energy-food security nexus based selection of energy recovery from wastewater treatment technologies: An extended decision making framework under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 43, 100937. doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2020.100937 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Freire, S. M., Nascimento, A., & de Almeida, R. T. (2019). A multiple criteria decision making system for setting priorities. IFMBE Proceedings, 68(1), 357-361. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-9035-6_65 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ghasempour, R., Nazari, M. A., Ebrahimi, M., Ahmadi, M. H., & Hadiyanto, H. (2019). Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach for selecting solar plants site and technology: A review. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 8(1), 15-25. doi: 10.14710/ijred.8.1.15-25 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Gil-de-Castro, A., Moreno Muñoz, A., López Rodríguez, M. A., & De La Rosa, J. J. G. (2010). Energy supply for sustainable regional development in Cordoba. 2010 9th Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering, EEEIC 2010, 5490026, 6-9. doi: 10.1109/EEEIC.2010.5490026 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Glińska, E., & Siemieniako, D. (2018). Binge drinking in relation to services – bibliometric analysis of scientific research directions. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 10(1), 45-54. doi: 10.1515/emj-2018-0004 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Govind Kharat, M., et al. (2019). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis for environmentally conscious solid waste treatment and disposal technology selection. Technology in Society, 57, 20-29. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.005 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Gudanowska, A. E. (2017). A map of current research trends within technology management in the light of selected literature. Management and Production Engineering Review, 8(1), 78-88. doi: 10.1515/mper2017-0009 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hajduk, S. (2017). Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on City Logistics in International Scientific Literature. Procedia Engineering, 182, 282-290. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.194 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Halicka, K. (2017). Main Concepts of Technology Analysis in the Light of the Literature on the Subject. Procedia Engineering, 182, 291-298. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.196 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Halicka, K. (2020). Technology Selection Using the TOPSIS Method. Foresight and STI Governance, 14(1), 85-96. doi: 10.17323/2500-2597.2020.1.85.96 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hallerbach W., & Spronk J. (2003). The relevance of MCDM for financial decisions. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 11, 187-195. doi: 10.1002/mcda.328 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hamzeh, S. R., & Xun, X. (2019). Technology Selection Methods and Applications in Manufacturing: A Review from 1990 to 2017. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 138, 106123. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2019.106123 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hilgerink, M. P., Hummel, M. J. M., Manohar, S., Vaartjes, S. R. I., & Jzerman, M. J. (2011). Assessment of the added value of the Twente Photoacoustic Mammo-scope in breast cancer diagnosis. Medical Devices-Evidence and Research, 4, 107-115. doi: 10.2147/MDER. S20169 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Houseman, O., Tiwari, A., & Roy, R. (2004). A methodology for the selection of new technologies in the aviation industry. Decision Engineering Report Series. Retrieved from https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/772 Search in Google Scholar

Hummel et al. (2012). Using the analytic hierarchy process to elicit patient preferences: Prioritizing multiple outcome measures of antidepressant drug treatment. Patient, 5(4), 25-237. doi: 10.2165/11635240-000000000-00000 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Husereau, D., Boucher, M., & Noorani, H. (2010). Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 26(3), 341-347. doi: 10.1017/S0266462310000383 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications: A State of the Art Survey. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag. Search in Google Scholar

Ibáñez-Forés, V., Bovea, M. D., & Pérez-Belis, V. (2014). A holistic review of applied methodologies for assessing and selecting the optimal technological alternative from a sustainability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 70, 259-281. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.082 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ighravwe, D. E., & Mashao, D. (2019). Development of a Techno-economic Framework for Renewable Energy Project Financing. Proceedings Of 2019 Ieee 2nd International Conference On Renewable Energy And Power Engineering (REPE 2019),120-124. doi: 10.1109/REPE48501.2019.9025162 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ilangkumaran, M., et al. (2013). Optimization of waste-water treatment technology selection using hybrid MCDM. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 24(5), 619-641. doi: 10.1108/MEQ-07-2012-0053 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Improta, G., Derrone, A., Russo, M. A., & Triassi, M. (2019). Health technology assessment (HTA) of optoelectronic biosensors for oncology by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Likert scale. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 140. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0775-z Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Improta, G., et al. (2018). Use of the AHP methodology in system dynamics: Modelling and simulation for health technology assessments to determine the correct prosthesis choice for hernia diseases. Mathematical Biosciences, 299, 19-27. doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2018.03.004 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Isoke, J., & Van Dijk, M. P. (2014). Factors influencing selection of drinking water technologies for urban informal settlements in Kampala. Water and Environment Journal, 28(3), 423-433. doi: 10.1111/wej.12058 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ivlev, I., Vacek, J., & Kneppo, P. (2015). Multi-criteria decision analysis for supporting the selection of medical devices under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 247(1), 216-228. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.075 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jiang, J., Jain, A., Lui, J., Garcia, J., & Limarta, S. (2015). Technology assessment of waste disposal technologies for Tillamook county. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), 408-421. doi: 10.1109/PIC-MET.2015.7273110. Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jin, Z., & Gambatese, J. (2020). A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Approach to Technology Selection for Concrete Formwork Monitoring. Construction Research Congress 2020: Computer Applications - Selected Papers from the Construction Research Congress 2020, 76-85. doi: 10.1061/9780784482865.009 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jurickova, I., & Kraina, A. (2014). Case study: Mobile X-ray equipment selection for a traumatology department using value engineering and multi-criteria decision methods. Proceedings IWBBIO 2014: International Work-Conference On Bioinformatics And Biomedical Engineering, 1-2, 1389-1402. Search in Google Scholar

Kafuku, J. M., Saman, M. Z. M., & Yusof, S. M. (2019). Application of Fuzzy Logic in Selection of Remanufac-turing Technology. Procedia Manufacturing, 33, 192-199. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2019.04.023 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Karatas, M., Karacan, I., & Tozan, H. (2018). An integrated multi-criteria decision making methodology for health technology assessment. European Journal of Industrial Engineering, 12(4), 504-534. doi: 10.1504/EJIE.2018.093637 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Karrer, L., Zhang, S. X., Kuhlein, T., & Kolominsky-Rabas, P. L. (2021). Exploring physicians and patients’ perspectives for current interventions on thyroid nodules using a MCDA method. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 19(1), 26. doi: 10.1186/s12962-021-00279-3 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Karsak, E. E., & Ahiska, S. S. (2005). Practical common weight multi-criteria decision-making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection. International Journal of Production Research, 43(8), 1537-1554. doi: 10.1080/13528160412331326478 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kaur, G., et al. (2019). Criteria Used for Priority-Setting for Public Health Resource Allocation in Lowand Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 35(6), 474-483. doi: 10.1017/S0266462319000473 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kelley, L. T., Egan, R., Stockley, D., & Johnson, A. P. (2018). Evaluating multi-criteria decision-making in health technology assessment. Health Policy and Technology, 7(3), 310-317. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2018.05.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kharat, M. G., Murthy, S., Kamble, S. J., & Kharat, M. G. (2020). Selecting sustainable technologies for municipal solid waste treatment and disposal: An expert based MCDM approach. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, 46(1), 44-57. doi: 10.5276/JSWTM/2020.44 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Khatri, J., & Srivastava, M. (2016). Technology selection for sustainable supply chains. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 15(3), 275-289. doi: 10.1386/tmsd.15.3.275_1 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kolasa, K., Zwolinski, K. M., Zah, V., Kalo, Z., & Lewandowski, T. (2018). Revealed preferences towards the appraisal of orphan drugs in Poland - multi criteria decision analysis. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 13, 67. doi: 10.1186/s13023-018-0803-9 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kolli, S., & Parsaei, H. R. (1992). Multicriteria analysis in the evaluation of advanced manufacturing technology using PROMETHEE. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 23(1-4), 455-458. doi: 10.1016/0360-8352(92)90159-H Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Krishnan, V., & Bhattacharya, S. (2002). Technology selection and commitment in new product development: The role of uncertainty and design flexibility. Management Science, 48(3), 313-327. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.48.3.313.7728 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Kwon, S. H., Park, S. K., Byun, J. H., & Lee, E. K. (2017). Eliciting societal preferences of reimbursement decision criteria for anti cancer drugs in South Korea. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 17(4), 411-419. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1277144 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Laba, T. L., Jiwani, B., Crossland, R., & Mitton, C. (2020). Can multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) be implemented into real-world drug decision-making processes? A Canadian provincial experience. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 36(4), 434-439. doi: 10.1017/S0266462320000525 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Lasorsa, I., Padoano, E., Marceglia, S., & Accardo, A. (2019). Multi-criteria decision analysis for the assessment of non-clinical hospital services: Methodology and case study. Operations Research for Health Care, 23, 100171. doi: 10.1016/j.orhc.2018.08.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Li, Y., & Hu, Z. (2022). A review of multi-attributes decision-making models for offshore oil and gas facilities decommissioning. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science, 7(1), 58-74. doi: 10.1016/j.joes.2021.05.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Liu, Y., & Du, J. L. (2020). A multi criteria decision support framework for renewable energy storage technology selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 277, 122183. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122183 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Long, Y., Tang, M., & Liao, H. (2021). Renewable energy source technology selection considering the em-pathetic preferences of experts in a cognitive fuzzy social participatory allocation network. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121317. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121317 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Lootsma, F. A., Mensch, T. C. A., & Vos, F. A. (1990). Multi-criteria analysis and budget reallocation in long-term research planning. European Journal of Operational Research, 47, 295-305. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90216-X Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Lu, C., You, J. X., Liu, H. C., & Li, P. (2016). Health-Care Waste Treatment Technology Selection Using the Interval 2-Tuple Induced TOPSIS Method. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(6), 562. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13060562 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ma, D., Chang, C.C., & Hung, S.W. (2013). The selection of technology for late-starters: A case study of the energy-smart photovoltaic industry. Economic Modelling, 35, 10-20. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.06.030 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mall, S., & Anbanandam, R. (2022). A Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and VIKOR Framework for Evaluation and Selection of Electric Vehicle Charging Technology for India. Transportation in Developing Economies, 8(14). doi: 10.1007/s40890-022-00150-x Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Halicka, K., Ejdys, J., Magruk, A. & Ahmad, U. (2018). Determining the utility in management by using multi-criteria decision support tools: a review. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 31(1),1666-1716. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2018.1488600 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Marsh, K. D., Sculpher, M., Caro, J. J., & Tervonen, T. (2018). The Use of MCDA in HTA: Great Potential, but More Effort Needed. Value in Health, 21(4), 394-397. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Marsh, K., Caro, J. J., Zaiser, E., Heywood, J., & Hamed, A. (2018). Patient-centered decision making: lessons from multi-criteria decision analysis for quantifying patient preferences. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 34(1), 105-110 doi: 10.1017/S0266462317001118 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Marsh, K., et al. (2014). Assessing the Value of Healthcare Interventions Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Review of the Literature. Pharmacoeconomics, 32(4), 345-365. doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0135-0 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Martelli, N., et al. (2016). Combining multi-criteria decision analysis and mini-health technology assessment: A funding decision-support tool for medical devices in a university hospital setting. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 59, 201-208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.12.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Meerholz, A., & Brent, A.C. (2012). Assessing the sustainability of wastewater treatment technologies in the petrochemical industry. 2012 IEEE International Technology Management Conference, ITMC 2012, 6306395, 387-392. doi: 10.1109/ITMC.2012.6306395 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Michalski, A., Głodziński, E. & Bӧde, K. (2022). Lean construction management techniques and BIM technology – systematic literature review. Procedia Computer Science, 196, 1036-1043. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.107 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mobinizadeh, M., et al. (2016). A model for priority setting of health technology assessment: the experience of AHP-TOPSIS combination approach. Daru-Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 24, 10. doi: 10.1186/s40199-016-0148-7 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Montazeri, M. & Najjartabar Bisheh, M. (2017). Optimizing Technology Selection for Power Smart Grid Systems: a Case Study of Iran Power Distribution Industry (IPDI). Technology and Economics of Smart Grids and Sustainable Energy, 2. doi: 10.1007/s40866-017-0021-x Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mpanang’ombe, W., Tilley, E., Zabaleta, I., & Zurbrügg, C. (2018). A biowaste treatment technology assessment in Malawi. Recycling, 3(4), 55. doi: 10.3390/recycling3040055 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Muerza, V. de Arcocha, D., Larrodé, E., & Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2014). The multicriteria selection of products in technological diversification strategies: An application to the Spanish automotive industry based on AHP. Production Planning & Control, 25(8), 715-728. doi: 10.1080/09537287.2013.798089 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mühlbacher, A. C., & Juhnke, C. (2016). Involving patients, the insured and the general public in healthcare decision making [Patienten- und Bürgerpartizipation in der Entscheidungsfindung im Gesundheitswesen insbesondere bei der Bewertung von Arzneimitteln]. Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen, 110-111, 36-44. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2015.12.001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Narayanamoorthy, S., et al. (2021). A new extension of hesitant fuzzy set: An application to an offshore wind turbine technology selection process. IET Renewable Power Generation, 15(11), 2340-2355 doi: 10.1049/rpg2.12168 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Nur, F., Burch, V. R. F. Marufuzzaman, M., & Smith, B. K. (2021). Handheld Technology Selection, Evaluation, and Risk Mitigation Using Stochastic Analytical Hierarchical Process: A Standardization of the Request for Proposal Process. Engineering Management Journal (Early Access). doi: 10.1080/10429247.2020.1847561 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Onar, S. C., Oztaysi, B., Otay, I., & Kahraman, C. (2015). Multi-expert wind energy technology selection using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Energy, 90, 274-285. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.086 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Oortwijn, W., & Klein, P. (2019). Addressing Health System Values in Health Technology Assessment: The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 35(2), 82-84. doi: 10.1017/S0266462319000187 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Özkale, C., Celik, C., Turkmen, A. & Cakmaz, E. (2016). Decision analysis application intended for selection of a power plant running on renewable energy sources. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.006. Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Oztaysi, B. (2014). A decision model for information technology selection using AHP integrated TOPSIS-Grey: The case of content management systems. Knowledge-Based Systems, 70, 44-54. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2014.02.010 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Oztaysi, B., Cevik Onar, S., Kahraman, C., & Yavuz, M. (2017). Multi-criteria alternative-fuel technology selection using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 53, 128-148. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2017.04.003 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Peterseim, J. H., White, S., Tadros, A., & Hellwig, U. (2013). Concentrated solar power hybrid plants, which technologies are best suited for hybridisation? Renewable Energy, 57, 520-532. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2013.02.014 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Pohekar, S. D., & Ramachandran, M. (2004). Application of MCDM to sustainable energy planning – a review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Review, 8, 365-381. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2003.12.007 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ragavan, P., & Punniyamoorthy, M. (2003). A strategic decision model for the justification of technology selection. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21(1), 72-78. doi: 10.1007/s001700300008 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Ren, J., & Lützen, M. (2015). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method for technology selection for emissions reduction from shipping under uncertainties. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 40, 43-60. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2015.07.012 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Rogalewicz, V., & Jurickova, I. (2014). Specificities of Medical Devices Affecting Health Technology Assessment Methodology. Proceedings IWBBIO 2014: International Work-Conference On Bioinformatics And Biomedical Engineering, 1-2, 1229-1234. Search in Google Scholar

Saaty, T. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. New York, USA: McGraw Hill. Search in Google Scholar

Saaty, T. (2005). The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement for Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. State of the Art Surveys, (pp. 345–408). New York, USA: Springer. Search in Google Scholar

Sadr, S. M. K., Onder, T., Saroj, D., & Ouki, S. (2013). Appraisal of membrane processes for technology selection in centralized wastewater reuse scenarios. Sustainable Environment Research, 23(2), 69-78. Search in Google Scholar

Saen, R. F. (2006). A decision model for technology selection in the existence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181(2), 1600-1608. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2006.03.012 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Salamirad, A., Kheybari, S., Ishizaka, A., & Farazmand, H. (2021). Wastewater treatment technology selection using a hybrid multicriteria decision-making method. International Transactions in Operational Research, article in press. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350691691_Wastewater_treatment_technology_selection_using_a_hybrid_multicriteria_decision-making_method Search in Google Scholar

Santos, F. A., & Garcia, R. (2010). Decision process model to the Health Technology incorporation. 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC’10, 5627344, 414-417. doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2010.5627344 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Savun, B., Erbay, B., Hekimoglu, M., & Burak, S. (2020). Evaluation of water supply alternatives for Istanbul using forecasting and multi-criteria decision making methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 287, 125080. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125080 Search in Google Scholar

Schmitz, S., et al. (2016). Identifying and Revealing the Importance of Decision-Making Criteria for Health Technology Assessment: A Retrospective Analysis of Reimbursement Recommendations in Ireland. Pharmacoeconomics, 34(9), 925-937. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0406-z Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Schneberger, J. H., Kaspar, J., & Vielhaber, M. (2019). Integrated and customer-oriented material and process selection by sensory multi-criteria decision-making. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, 1(1), 1175-1184. doi: 10.1017/dsi.2019.123 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Scott, J. A., Ho, W., & Dey, P. K. (2012). A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems, Energy, 42(1), 146-156. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2012.03.074 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Shen, Y. C., Chang, S. H., Lin, G. T., & Yu, H. C. (2010). A hybrid selection model for emerging technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(1), 151-166. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.05.001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Si, J., Marjanovic-Halburd, L., Nasiri, F., & Bell, S. (2016). Assessment of building-integrated green technologies: A review and case study on applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27, 106-115. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.013 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Siderska, J., & Jadaa, K. S. (2018). Cloud manufacturing: a service-oriented manufacturing paradigm. A review paper. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 10(1), 22-31. doi: 10.1515/emj-2018-0002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Siemieniako, D., Kubacki, K., & Mitręga, M. (2021). Inter-organisational relationships for social impact: A systematic literature review. Journal of Business Research, 132, 453-469. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.026 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Singh, N., & Sushil (1990). Technology selection models for multi-stage production systems: Joint application of physical system theory and mathematical programming. European Journal of Operational Research, 47(2), 248-261. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90283-H Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Stojanovic, C., Bogdanovic, D., & Urošević, S. (2015). Selection of the optimal technology for surface mining by multi-criteria analysis. Kuwait Journal of Science, 42, 170-190. Search in Google Scholar

Štreimikiene, D. (2013). Assessment of energy technologies in electricity and transport sectors based on carbon intensity and costs. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19(4), 606-620. doi: 10.3846/20294913.2013.837113 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Streimikiene, D., & Balezentiene, L. (2012). Assessment of electricity generation technologies based on ghg emission reduction potential and costs. Transformations in Business and Economics, 11(2 A), 333-343. Search in Google Scholar

Streimikiene, D., Baležentis, T., & Baležentiene, L. (2013). Comparative assessment of road transport technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 20, 611-618. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.021 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Sun, X., Yu, H., Solvang, W. D., Wang, Y., & Wang, K. (2022). The application of Industry 4.0 technologies in sustainable logistics: a systematic literature review (2012-2020) to explore future research opportunities. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(7), 9560-9591. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-17693-y Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Szpilko, D., & Ejdys, J. (2022). Europen Green Deal – research directions. Systematic literature review. Ekonomia i Srodowisko – Economics and Environment, 2(80), article in press. Search in Google Scholar

Szpilko, D., Szydło, J., & Winkowska, J. (2020). Social Participation of City Inhabitants Versus Their Future Orientation. Evidence from Poland. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 17, 692-702. doi: 10.37394/23207.2020.17.67 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Szum, K. (2021). IoT-based smart cities: a bibliometric analysis and literature review. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 13(2), 115-136. doi: 10.2478/emj-2021-0017 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Tal, O., Booch, M., & Bar-Yehuda, S. (2019). Hospital staff perspectives towards health technology assessment: data from a multidisciplinary survey. Health Research Policy and Systems, 17, 72. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0469-3 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Torkayesh, A. E., Malmir, B., & Rajabi Asadabadi, M. (2021). Sustainable waste disposal technology selection: The stratified best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Waste Management, 122, 100-112. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.040 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Turschwell, M. P., et al. (2022). A review of support tools to assess multi-sector interactions in the emerging offshore Blue Economy. Environmental Science and Policy, 133, 203-214. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.03.016 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Tzeng, G. H., & Huang, J. J. (2011). Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Methods and Applications. London, UK: CRC Press. Search in Google Scholar

Tzeng, G. H., Lin, C. W., & Opricovic, S. (2005). Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy, 33(11), 1373-1383. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.014 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111, 1053-1070. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

van Overbeeke, E., Forrester, V., Simoens, S., & Huys, I. (2021). Use of Patient Preferences in Health Technology Assessment: Perspectives of Canadian, Belgian and German HTA Representatives. Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research, 14(1), 119-128. doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00449-0 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Villegas, L. V., Salgado, J., Perilla, S. P., & Melo, J. (2020). Characterization of Medical Equipment Acquisition Processes by Considering the Evaluation of Technology, Pilot Case: POCT Blood Gas Analyzers. IFMBE Proceedings, 75, 1398-1402. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-30648-9_180 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Vinodh, S., Nagaraj, S., & Girubha, J. (2014). Application of Fuzzy VIKOR for selection of rapid prototyping technologies in an agile environment. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 20(6), 523-532. doi: 10.1108/RPJ-07-2012-0060 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Vivekh, P., Sudhakar, M., Srinivas, M., & Vishwanthkumar, V. (2016). Desalination technology selection using multi-criteria evaluation: TOPSIS and PROMETHEE-2. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 12, ctw001. doi: 10.1093/ijlct/ctw001 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Wahlster, P. (2015). Exploring the perspectives and preferences for HTA across German healthcare stakeholders using a multi-criteria assessment of a pulmonary heart sensor as a case study. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13, 24. doi: 10.1186/s12961-015-0011-1 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Wang, G., Tian, X., & Geng, J. (2014). Optimal selection method of process patents for technology transfer using fuzzy linguistic computing. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 13, 1-10. doi: 10.1155/2014/107108 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Winkowska, J., Szpilko, D., & Pejić, S. (2019). Smart city concept in the light of the literature review. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 11(2), 70-86. doi: 10.2478/emj-2019-0012 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Xiao, F. (2018) A novel multi-criteria decision making method for assessing health-care waste treatment technologies based on D numbers. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 71, 216-225. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2018.03.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Yalcin, A. S., Kilic, H. S., & Delen, D. (2022). The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in business analytics: A comprehensive literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121193. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121193 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Yimen, N., & Dagbasi, M. (2019). Multi-attribute decision-making: Applying a modified Brown–Gibson model and RETScreen software to the optimal location process of utility-scale photovoltaic plants. Processes, 7(8), 505. doi: 10.3390/pr7080505 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Zanakis, S. H., Solomon, A., Wishart N., & Dublish, S. (1998). Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3), 507-529. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00147-1 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Zelei, T., Mendola, N. D., Elezbawy, B., Nemeth, B., & Campbell, J. D. (2021). Criteria and Scoring Functions Used in Multi-criteria Decision Analysis and Value Frameworks for the Assessment of Rare Disease Therapies: A Systematic Literature Review. Pharmacoeconomics-Open, 5(4), 605-612. doi: 10.1007/s41669-021-00271-w Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Zhang, C. H., Chen, C., Streimikiene, D., & Balezentis, T. (2019). Intuitionistic fuzzy MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria assessment of the energy storage technologies. Applied Soft Computing, 79, 410-423. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2019.04.008 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar