Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Decision Making: P-value Method

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...

Weighted Mean

Weighted Mean

While taking the arithmetic, geometric, or harmonic mean of a sample data set, equal importance is assigned to all the data points. However, all the values may not always be equally important in some data sets. An intrinsic bias might make it more important to give more weightage to specific values over others.
For example, consider the number of goals scored in the matches of a tournament. While computing the average number of goals scored in the tournament, it may be more important to...

Decision Making: Traditional Method

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...

Decision Making

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

Heuristics

Heuristics

Heuristics are problem-solving strategies that use mental shortcuts to simplify decision-making. Unlike algorithms, which must be followed precisely to achieve a correct result, heuristics offer a general problem-solving framework. They save time and energy but can sometimes lead to less rational decisions.
People often rely on heuristics when faced with an overload of information, limited time, low importance of the decision, limited information, or when a heuristic readily comes to mind. For...

Methods of Medium Optimization

Methods of Medium Optimization

Optimizing growth media enhances microbial proliferation and maximizes product yield. Statistical experimental design methodologies provide structured and reproducible approaches, offering progressively higher levels of robustness and efficiency.The One-Factor-at-a-Time (OFAT) MethodThe One-Factor-at-a-Time (OFAT) method involves adjusting a single variable while keeping all others constant. However, it cannot detect interactions between variables, often leading to suboptimal outcomes when...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Advancing proton therapy: Dosimetric superiority of proton arc therapy over IMPT in esophageal cancer treatment.

Journal of applied clinical medical physics·2026

Same author

A Systematic Review of Quantitative Health Preference Methods to Support Value Clarification and Shared Decision Making: A Report of an ISPOR Special Interest Group.

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research·2026

Same author

Commissioning and clinical implementation of Monaco treatment planning system on a compact pencil beam scanning proton therapy system.

Journal of applied clinical medical physics·2026

Same author

General practitioners' antibiotic prescribing decisions in the Northern Dutch-German cross-border region: a discrete choice experiment.

BMC primary care·2025

Same author

Unlocking Patient Preferences: The Potential of Stated-Preference Methods in Clinical Decision Making.

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research·2025

Same author

Health Outcome Preferences and Trade-offs Among Older Adults With Advanced CKD: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation·2025

Same journal

Research on the incentive effect of government tax refunds on R&D investment of pharmaceutical enterprises.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

Same journal

Bridging community and facility care: cost-effectiveness of implementing 2019 childhood pneumonia management guidelines in India.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

Same journal

Changes in healthcare utilization before and after the implementation of a national dementia policy in Korea.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

Same journal

Extended cost-effectiveness analysis in global health systems: a scoping review of geographic gaps and research trends.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

Same journal

Understanding provider behavioral responses to capitation prepayment systems: an integrated mixed-methods approach.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

Same journal

Quantitative evaluation of the medical resource allocation policy in China: a PMC-index model approach.

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 14, 2026

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

Does technique matter; a pilot study exploring weighting techniques for a multi-criteria decision support framework.

Janine van Til¹, Catharina Groothuis-Oudshoorn¹, Marijke Lieferink¹

¹University of Twente, MB-HTSR, PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands.

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E

|April 24, 2015

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

The choice of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) weighting technique significantly impacts individual decisions but not group outcomes. Pairwise comparison offers superior discrimination for individual decision support in healthcare interventions.

Keywords:

Decision support Health care Multi-criteria decision analysis Preferences Weighting techniques

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 14, 2026

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

Area of Science:

Health economics
Decision science
Health services research

Background:

Growing interest in multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for healthcare decision-making.
The EVIDEM framework aids in valuing healthcare interventions and priority setting.
Need to understand the impact of different weighting techniques in MCDA.

Purpose of the Study:

Assess the influence of various weighting techniques on MCDA outcomes.
Evaluate the discriminative power of different techniques for weighting criteria.
Determine if MCDA techniques yield similar weights for the EVIDEM framework criteria.

Main Methods:

60 Dutch and Canadian students participated.
Online survey used for weighting 14 criteria.
Two techniques employed: rating scale and randomly selected (ranking, point allocation, pairwise comparison, best-worst scaling).

Main Results:

No significant effect of weight differences on value estimates at the group level.
Individual-level criteria weights and rank order varied considerably based on elicitation method.
Pairwise comparison demonstrated the highest ability to discriminate criteria importance among tested techniques.

Conclusions:

Weighting technique choice has minimal impact on group decisions and overall innovation value.
Individual decision support is influenced by the elicitation technique, affecting comparability of studies.
Pairwise comparison is recommended for individual decision support due to superior discrimination of preferences.