Prioritizing Individuals Who Will Have Covid-19 Vaccine with Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

Abstract

This study aims to prioritize individuals in vaccination for the effective use of the COVID-19 vaccine, which has limited supply and does not seem possible to be supplied by all countries at the same time. In the study, multi-criteria decision-making methods (MCDM), which offer practical solutions to decision problems, were used considering the structure of the problem. First, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to calculate the weights of the criteria. Then, the ranking of the priorities of the individuals was carried out with the PROMETHEE method. Here, the AHP and PROMETHEE methods are used in an integrated manner. It has been determined that the highest priority individual in vaccination is a healthcare worker with a high potential for transmission. In order of priority, the second individual was identified as workers. In this study, a hierarchical structure was created to prioritize individuals who will be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the problem was solved in two stages. A health policy proposal was made to health managers to use limited vaccine resources by prioritizing individuals effectively. In terms of efficient and effective use of resources during possible pandemic periods, the application process of the study provides an exemplary solution for decision-makers and contributes to the solution of similar decision problems encountered both in the literature and in real life. At the same time, offers solution for disasters that require effective use of limited resources, etc. The implementation process of the study may also be taken into account in exceptional circumstances.

Keywords

• Covid-19
• Vaccine
• Multi criteria decision making
• AHP
• PROMETHEE

References

1. [1] https://covid19.saglik.gov.tr/. Access date: 30.07.2021.
2. [2] Kabak, M., Kazançoğlu, Y., “Teacher selection by using analytic hierarchy process and an application”, Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Science, 14(1): 95–111, (2012).
3. [3] Özder, E. H., Bedir, N. and Eren, T., “Researcher selection problem in higher education by using multi criteria decision making: a case study”, Alanya Academic Review, 3(1): 19–33, (2019).
4. [4] Kenger, M. D. and Organ, A., “Assessment of bank personnel selection by using multiple cirteria decision making method entropy based aras”, Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 4(4): 152–170, (2017).
5. [5] Deringöz, A., Danışan, T. and Eren, T., "Evaluation of wearable health technologies with MCDM methods in COVID-19 monitoring”, Journal of Polytechnic, 1-1, (2021). In press.
6. [6] Dooling, K., “COVID-19 vaccine prioritization: work group considerations”, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, (2020).
7. [7] Bubar, K. M., Reinholt, K., Kissler, S. M., Lipsitch, M., Cobey, S., Grad, Y.H. and Larremore, D.B., “Model-informed COVID-19 vaccine prioritization strategies by age and serostatus”, Journal of Science, 371(6532): 916–921, (2021).
8. [8] Hezam, I. M., Nayeem, M. K., Foul, A. and Alrasheedi, A. F., “Covid-19 vaccine: a neutrosophic mcdm approach for determining the priority groups”, Results in Physics, 20(103654): 1-12, (2021).

9. [9] Liu, H. C., Qin, J. T., Mao, L. X. and Zhang, Z. Y., “Personnel selection using interval 2-tuple linguistic vikor method”, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries, 25(3): 370–381, (2015).
10. [10] Houria, Z. B., Besbes, M., Elaoud, B., Masmoudi, M. and Masmoudi, F., “Maintenance strategy selection for medical equipments using fuzzy multiple”, CIE45 Proceedings, Metz, 1–8, (2015).
11. [11] Petrova, V., “Using the analytic hierarchy process for LMS selection”, CompSysTech’19: 20. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies, 332-336, (2019).
12. [12] Alakaş, H. M., Gür, Ş., Özcan, E. and Eren, T., “Ranking of sustainability criteria for industrial symbiosis applications based on ANP”, Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 28(4): 192–201, (2020).
13. [13] Dağdeviren, M., “Decision making in equipment selection: An integrated approach with AHP and PROMETHEE”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 19(4): 397–406, (2008).
14. [14] Özcan, E., Gür, Ş. and Eren, T., “A hybrid model to optimize the maintenance policies in the hydroelectric power plants”, Journal of Polytechnic, 24(1): 75–86, (2021).
15. [15] Hamurcu, M. and Eren, T., “Electric bus selection with multicriteria decision analysis for green transportation”, Sustainability, 12(7): 2777, (2020).
16. [16] Li, H., Wang, W., Fan, L., Li, Q. and Chen, X., “A novel hybrid MCDM model for machine tool selection using fuzzy DEMATEL, entropy weighting and later defuzzification VIKOR”, Applied Soft Computing, 91(106207): 1-14, (2020).
17. [17] Aydın, A., Okten, S., Erkan, S., Bulut, M., Özcan, E., Tutar, A. and Eren T., “In – vitro anticancer and antibacterial activities of brominated indeno [1, 2-b] qinoline amines supported with molecular docking and MCDM”, European Chemical Societies Publishing, 6: 3286–3295, (2021).
18. [18] Özcan, E., Ökten, S. and Eren, T., “Decision making for promising quinoline-based anticancer agents through combined methodology”, Journal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology, 34(9): 1–10, (2020).
19. [19] Yazıcı, E., Üner, Sİ., Demir, A., Dinler, S. and Alakaş, HM., “Evaluation of supply sustainability of vaccine alternatives with multi‐criteria decision‐making methods”, The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 1-24, (2022). In press.
20. [20] Özkan, B., Özceylan, E., Kabak, M. and Uğraş Dikmen, A., “Evaluation of criteria and COVID-19 patients for intensive care unit admission in the era of pandemic: A multi-criteria decision making approach”, Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 209: 1-12, (2021).
21. [21] Liu, Y., Yang, Y., Liu, Y. and Tzeng, G., “Improving Sustainable Mobile Health Care Promotion: A Novel Hybrid MCDM Method”, Sustainability, 11(3): 1-29, (2019).
22. [22] Verma, P. and Dutta, S., “Critical success factors for better healthcare: an MCDM approach”, International Journal of Technology Marketing, 15(2-3), (2021).
23. [23] Cihan, Ş., Ayan, E., Eren, T., Topal, T. and Yıldırım, EK., “Echocardiography Device Selection with Multicriteria Decision Making Methods”, Journal of Health Sciences and Professions, 4(1): 41-49, (2017).
24. [24] Hamurcu, M. and Eren, T., “Selection of unmanned aerial vehicles by using multicriteria decision-making for defence”, Journal of Mathematics, 2020(4308756): 1-11, (2020).
25. [25] Shyamprasad, V. and Kousalya P., “Role of Consistency and Random Index in Analytic Hierarchy Process-A New Measure” Numerical Optimization in Engineering and Sciences, 279: 233-239, (2020).
26. [26] Şenkayas, H. and Hekimoğlu, H., “Application of PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria supplier selection problem”, Journal of Productivity, (2): 63–80, (2013).
27. [27] Bai, W. and Zhang, L., “How to finance for establishing hydrogen refueling stations in China? An analysis based on fuzzy AHP and PROMETHEE”, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 45(59): 34354–34370, (2020).
28. [28] Gür, Ş., Bedir, N. and Eren, T., “Selection of marketing strategies with analytical network process and PROMETHEE method for medium sized Business in food sector”, Nevsehir Journal of Science and Technology, 6(1): 79–92, (2017).