Rank aggregation methods comparison: A case for triage prioritization

This paper seeks to test and to determine a suitable aggregation method to represent a set of rankings made by individual decision makers (DMs). A case study for triage prioritization is used to test the aggregation methods. The triage is a decision-making process with which patients are prioritized according to their medical condition and chance of survival on arrival at the emergency department (ED). There is a lot of subjective decision-making in the process which leads to discrepancies among nurses. Four rank aggregation methods are applied to the prioritization data and then an expert evaluates the results and judges them on practicality and acceptability. The proposed recommendation for preference aggregation is the method of the estimation of utility intervals. Expert opinion is highly valued in a decision-making environment such as this, where experience and intuition are key to successful job performance and outcomes.

[1]  P. Thomas,et al.  What Is Social Studies , 1983 .

[2]  L. Seiford,et al.  Priority Ranking and Consensus Formation , 1978 .

[3]  Andris Freivalds,et al.  Triage Decision Making: Discrepancies in assigning the Emergency Severity Index , 2009 .

[4]  P G Zimmermann,et al.  The case for a universal, valid, reliable 5-tier triage acuity scale for US emergency departments. , 2001, Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association.

[5]  Ying-Ming Wang,et al.  A minimax disparity approach for obtaining OWA operator weights , 2005, Inf. Sci..

[6]  K. Cone,et al.  Characteristics, insights, decision making, and preparation of ED triage nurses. , 2002, Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association.

[7]  Rosenau Do,et al.  Emergency Severity Index, Version 4. , 2012 .

[8]  Vimla L Patel,et al.  Calibrating urgency: triage decision-making in a pediatric emergency department , 2008, Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice.

[9]  K. Bogart.  Preference Structures. II: Distances Between Asymmetric Relations , 1975 .

[10]  R. Beveridge,et al.  CAEP issues. The Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale: a new and critical element in health care reform. Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. , 1998, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[11]  L. A. Goodman,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[12]  Zhongsheng Hua,et al.  Aggregating preference rankings using OWA operator weights , 2007, Inf. Sci..

[13]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision-making , 1988 .

[14]  Ivan Popchev,et al.  Aggregation of fuzzy preference relations to multicriteria decision making , 2007, Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak..

[15]  Ching-Hsue Cheng,et al.  Flexible fuzzy OWA querying method for hemodialysis database , 2006, Soft Comput..

[16]  Xinwang Liu,et al.  Parameterized defuzzification with continuous weighted quasi-arithmetic means - An extension , 2009, Inf. Sci..

[17]  P.-C.-F. Daunou,et al.  Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin , 1803 .

[18]  W. Cook,et al.  A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings , 1990 .

[19]  Mehrdad Tamiz,et al.  An enhanced approach to the ranked voting system , 2007 .

[20]  A. Andersson,et al.  Triage in the emergency department--a qualitative study of the factors which nurses consider when making decisions. , 2006, Nursing in critical care.

[21]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  Bipolar preference modeling and aggregation in decision support , 2008, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[22]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A preference aggregation method through the estimation of utility intervals , 2005, Comput. Oper. Res..

[23]  L. Seiford,et al.  A general framework for distance-based consensus in ordinal ranking models , 1997 .

[24]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[25]  Ken-ichi Inada,et al.  A Note on the Simple Majority Decision Rule , 1964 .

[26]  YM Wang,et al.  Three new models for preference voting and aggregation , 2007, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[27]  K. Bogart.  Preference structures I: Distances between transitive preference relations† , 1973 .

[28]  D. Buesching,et al.  Inappropriate emergency department visits. , 1985, Annals of emergency medicine.