Evaluation of Metropolitan Cities Using Multiple Methods in terms of Healthcare Performance: The Case of Türkiye

Year 2025, Volume: 9 Issue: 3, 807 - 822, 29.09.2025

Nuh Keleş

https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1605428

Abstract

Sağlık sektörü, pandemi gibi karmaşık bir durumda, devam eden hastalıkların tedavisinde en önemli sektörlerden biridir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye'deki büyükehirlerden oluşan bir örneklemin sağlık hizmeti performansını değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Göstergeler, sağlık tesisleri ve altyapısı, sağlık hizmetlerinin kullanımı, sağlık için insan kaynakları ve acil sağlık hizmetleri gibi çeşitli gruplara ayrılmıştır. Bu çalışmada 25 kriter ve 30 metropol şehir kullanılarak 2017-2021 dönemi CVM ve ELECTRE I yöntemi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Karşılaştırmalar CVM-LOPCOW ve ELECTRE I-PROMETHEE II-VIKOR-MCRAT-RAPS-RAMS-RATMI yöntemleri kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Duyarlılık analizi, CVM, LOPCOW, CRITIC, SD, Entropy, WENSLO, MEREC ve MEREC-G modelleri ile ağırlıklandırılarak yapılmıştır. 25 kriter arasında en önemli kriter hastanede ortalama kalış süresidir (%5,6). Değişkenlerin nüfusa göre bölünmesi amaçlanmış olsa da, gelişmiş şehirler nüfus fazlalığına bağlı olarak öne çıkmaktadır. İstanbul birçok kriterde en yüksek değerlere sahip olmasına rağmen, diğerlerine kıyasla nüfus bakımından daha fazla kişiye sağlık hizmeti sunduğu için ikinci sırada yer almaktadır.

Keywords

CVM , ELECTRE I , Sağlık Hizmetleri , ÇKKV

Evaluation of Metropolitan Cities Using Multiple Methods in terms of Healthcare Performance: The Case of Türkiye

Abstract

The healthcare sector is one of the most important sectors in a complex situation such as a pandemic, in the treatment of ongoing diseases. This study aims to evaluate healthcare performance of a sample of metropolitan cities in Türkiye. Indicators are divided into various groups, such as healthcare facilities and infrastructure, utilization of healthcare services, human resources for health, and emergency health services. This study used 25 criteria and 30 metropolitan cities to evaluate the 2017-2021 period with the CVM and ELECTRE I method. Comparisons are made using CVM-LOPCOW and ELECTRE I-PROMETHEE II-VIKOR-MCRAT-RAPS-RAMS-RATMI methods. Sensitivity analysis is performed using the weights by the CVM, LOPCOW, CRITIC, SD, Entropy, WENSLO, MEREC, and MEREC-G models. The most important criterion is the average length of stay in hospital (5.6%) among all 25 criteria. Although variables are intended to be used by dividing by population, developed cities stand out depending on their overpopulation. Istanbul has the highest values in many criteria, but it ranks second as it provides health services to more people in terms of population compared to others.

Keywords

CVM , ELECTRE I , Healthcare , MCDM

References

• Abdulaal, R., & Bafail, O. A. (2022). Two new approaches (RAMS-RATMI) in multi-criteria decision-making tactics. Journal of Mathematics, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6725318.
• Abdulaal, R. M., Makki, A. A., & Al-Filali, I. Y. (2023). A novel hybrid approach for prioritizing investment initiatives to achieve financial sustainability in higher education institutions using MEREC-G and RATMI. Sustainability, 15(16), 12635. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612635.
• Alghawli, A. S. A., Nasser, A. A., & Aljober, M. N. (2021). A fuzzy MCDM approach for structured comparison of the health literacy level of hospitals. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(7). https://dx.doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120710.
• Asandului, L., Roman, M., & Fatulescu, P. (2014). The efficiency of healthcare systems in Europe: A data envelopment analysis approach. Procedia Economics and Finance, 10, 261-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00301-3
• Carra, M., Botticini, F., Pavesi, F. C., Maternini, G., Pezzagno, M., & Barabino, B. (2023). A comparative cycling path selection for sustainable tourism in Franciacorta. An integrated AHP-ELECTRE method. Transportation Research Procedia, 69, 448-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2023.02.194.
• Chen, P. (2019). A novel coordinated TOPSIS based on coefficient of variation. Mathematics, 7(7), 614. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7070614
• Chen, Y., Zeng, Y., & Du, J. (2021, July). Food supply system analysis method and information system establishment with quantitative analysis. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1982, No. 1, p. 012150). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1982/1/012150.
• Çağlar, A., & Keten, N. D. (2019). İllerin sağlık endeksi: Bileşik endeks yaklaşımı ile bir deneme. Duzce Medical Journal, 21(1), 42-53. https://doi.org/10.18678/dtfd.521027.
• Eren, H. & Ömürbek, N. (2019). Türkiye’nin sağlık göstergeleri açısından kümelenmesi ve performans analizi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(29), 421-452. https://doi.org/10.20875/makusobed.586081.
• Feng, D., Chen, Z., Yang, Y., Qiu, R., Qi, Y., & Liu, T. (2022, August). Water allocation model based on improved topsis method. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 2333, No. 1, p. 012004). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2333/1/012004.
• Groenendijk, R., Karaoglu, S., Gevers, T., & Mensink, T. (2021). Multi-loss weighting with coefficient of variations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision (pp. 1469-1478). https://doi.org/10.1109/WACV48630.2021.00151.
• Güler, E., Avcı, S., & Aladağ, Z. (2023). Earthquake risk prioritization via two-step cluster analysis and SWARA-ELECTRE methods. Sigma, 41(2), 356-372. https://doi.org/10.14744/sigma.2022.00105.
• HSY (2023). Health Statistics Yearbook. https://sbsgm.saglik.gov.tr/TR-93567/health-statistics-yearbook.html. 30.06.2023.
• Işık, M. (2023). Determining alternative crops with multi criteria decision making methods within the framework of land risk criteria. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 29(1), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.930020.
• Ka, B. (2011). Application of fuzzy AHP and ELECTRE to China dry port location selection. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 27(2), 331-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2092-5212(11)80015-5.
• Kadziński, M., & Ciomek, K. (2016). Integrated framework for preference modeling and robustness analysis for outranking-based multiple criteria sorting with ELECTRE and PROMETHEE. Information Sciences, 352, 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2016.02.059.
• Kalhor, R., Asefzadeh, S., & Ghamari, F. (2016). Ranking eastern mediterranean region countries (EMRO) based on the health impact indicators using multi-criteria decision approach. Health-care, 7(18), 28.
• Kaplan, G., Odabas, A., & Bozdoğan, T. (2023). Covid-19 pandemisinde bankaların finansal performanslarının ELECTRE ve TOPSIS yöntemleriyle değerlendirilmesi. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 7(2), 865-892. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1202706.
• Keleş, N. (2023a). Türkiye’nin 81 ilinin sağlık performansının güncel karar verme yöntemleriyle değerlendirilmesi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (75), 120-141. https://doi.org/10.51290/dpusbe.1134082.
• Keleş, N. (2023b). Measuring performances through multiplicative functions by modifying the MEREC method: MEREC-G and MEREC-H. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, 5(3), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIEOM-12-2022-0068.
• Liu, X., & Wan, S. P. (2019). A method to calculate the ranges of criteria weights in ELECTRE I and II methods. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 137, 106067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106067.
• Long, X., Wu, S., Wang, J., Wu, P., & Wang, Z. (2022). Urban water environment carrying capacity based on VPOSR-coefficient of variation-grey correlation model: A case of Beijing, China. Ecological Indicators, 138, 108863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108863.
• Lorcu, F., & Bolat, B. A. (2012). Comparison member and candidate countries to the European Union by means of main health indicators. China-USA Business Review, 11(4), 556-563.
• Ma, X., Zhang, J., & Zhang, L. (2020). Forest management decision model based on the entropy weight and coefficient of variation method. Academic Journal of Environment & Earth Science, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.25236/AJEE.2022.040210.
• Murat, D., & Güzel, S. (2023). SAARC ve OECD ülkelerinde sağlık göstergeleri yeterliliğinin ARAS ve WASPAS ile analizi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.33707/akuiibfd.1233313.
• Murray, E. T., Shelton, N., Norman, P., & Head, J. (2022). Measuring the health of people in places: a scoping review of OECD member countries. Health & Place, 73, 102731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102731.
• Nasser, A. A., Alkhulaidi, A. A., Ali, M. N., Hankal, M., & Al-olofe, M. (2019). A weighted euclidean distance-statistical variance procedure based approach for improving the healthcare decision making system in Yemen. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 12(3), 1-15. https://dx.doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2019/v12i3/140661.
• Orhan, C., Firat, M., & Yilmaz, S. (2022). Identification of priority areas for rehabilitation in wastewater systems using ENTROPY, ELECTRE and TOPSIS. Water Practice & Technology, 17(4), 835-851. https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2022.030.
• Ömürbek, N., Altin, F. G., Şimşek, A., & Eren, H. (2021). Entropi tabanlı veri zarflama analizi yöntemi ile Türkiye’deki illerin sağlık göstergeleri açısından etkinliğinin belirlenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 12(29), 16-45. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.754640.
• Pan, J., Fan, R., Zhang, H., Gao, Y., Shu, Z., & Chen, Z. (2022). Investigating the effectiveness of government public health systems against COVID-19 by hybrid MCDM approaches. Mathematics, 10(15), 2678. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152678.
• Qu, G., Zhang, Z., Qu, W., & Xu, Z. (2020). Green supplier selection based on green practices evaluated using fuzzy approaches of TOPSIS and ELECTRE with a case study in a Chinese internet company. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(9), 3268. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093268.
• Ritmak, N., Rattanawong, W., & Vongmanee, V. (2022). The dynamic evaluation model of health sustainability under MCDM benchmarking health indicator standards. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(1), 259. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010259.
• Rocha, A. (2023). Application of AHP and ELECTRE I decision-making methods to solve a health and safety problem. Procedia Computer Science, 219, 28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2023.01.260.
• Saygın, Z. Ö., & Kundakcı, N. (2020). WASPAS ve CODAS yöntemleri ile OECD ülkelerinin sağlık göstergeleri açısından kıyaslamalı analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 23(1), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.598630.
• Seo, Y., & Takikawa, T. (2022, May). Regional variation in national healthcare expenditure and health system performance in central cities and Suburbs in Japan. In Healthcare, 10(6), p. 968. MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10060968.
• Sun, Y., Liang, X., & Xiao, C. (2019). Assessing the influence of land use on groundwater pollution based on coefficient of variation weight method: A case study of Shuangliao City. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 34964-34976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06598-6.
• Şantaş, F., & Şantaş, G. (2018). Türkiye’nin, bölgelerin ve illerin sağlık değişkenleri açısından mevcut durumu ve sıralanması. Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(3), 2419-2432. https://doi.org/10.17218/hititsosbil.453033.
• Tchouaket, É. N., Lamarche, P. A., Goulet, L., & Contandriopoulos, A. P. (2012). Health care system performance of 27 OECD countries. The International journal of health planning and management, 27(2), 104-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.1110.
• TUIK (2025). https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Nufus-ve-Demografi-109. 13.05.2025.
• Türkoğlu, S. P. (2018). Avrupa ülkelerinin sağlık göstergelerinin TOPSIS yöntemi ile değerlendirilmesi. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.11616/asbed.v18i38800.459468.
• Urošević, K., Gligorić, Z., Miljanović, I., Beljić, Č., & Gligorić, M. (2021). Novel methods in multiple criteria decision-making process (Mcrat and raps)—Application in the mining industry. Mathematics, 9(16), 1980. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161980.
• Uddin, S., Ali, S. M., Kabir, G., Suhi, S. A., Enayet, R., & Haque, T. (2019). An AHP-ELECTRE framework to evaluate barriers to green supply chain management in the leather industry. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 26(8), 732-751. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2019.1661044.
• Uysal, H. T., & Yavuz, K. (2014). Selection of logistics centre location via ELECTRE method: A case study in Turkey. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(9), 276-289.
• Vysochan, O., Vysochan, O., Hyk, V., & Boychuk, A. (2022). Multi-criteria evaluation of innovative projects by means of ELECTRE application. Business: Theory and Practice, 23(2), 445-455.
• Wang, C. L., & Xu, X. F. (2019). Decision model for "Going Global" of China’s electric power technology and equipment. Procedia Computer Science, 162, 623-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.12.031.
• WHO (2023). World health statistics 2023: monitoring health for the SDGs, sustainable development goals. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240074323. 19.05.2023.
• Wilkinson, J. R., Berghmans, L., Imbert, F., Ledésert, B., Ochoa, A., & Members of the ISARE III Project Team. (2009). Health indicators in the European regions: Expanding regional comparisons to the new countries of the European Union–ISARE III. Public Health, 123(7), 490-495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2009.05.007.
• Wu, K., Peng, B., Xie, H., & Zhan, S. (2020). A coefficient of variation method to measure the extents of decentralization for bitcoin and ethereum networks. International Journal of Network Security, 22(2), 191-200.
• Wu, X., Liao, H., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2022). A probabilistic linguistic VIKOR method to solve MCDM problems with inconsistent criteria for different alternatives. Technological and economic development of economy, 28(2), 559-580. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2022.16634.
• Zhou, Y., Song, J., & Liu, H. (2023). Study on risk classification of light pollution in different regions based on entropy weight method and variation coefficient method. Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology, 50, 151-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.54097/hset.v50i.8502.