Search results for: working time model

Authors: Murat Arıbaş, Uğur Özcan

Abstract:

Due to the increasing number of universities and academics, the fund of the universities for research activities and grants/supports given by government institutions have increased number and quality of academic research projects. Although every academic research project has a specific purpose and importance, limited resources (money, time, manpower etc.) require choosing the best ones from all (Amiri, 2010). It is a pretty hard process to compare and determine which project is better such that the projects serve different purposes. In addition, the evaluation process has become complicated since there are more than one evaluator and multiple criteria for the evaluation (Dodangeh, Mojahed and Yusuff, 2009). Mehrez and Sinuany-Stern (1983) determined project selection problem as a Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem. If a decision problem involves multiple criteria and objectives, it is called as a Multi Attribute Decision Making problem (Ömürbek & Kınay, 2013). There are many MCDM methods in the literature for the solution of such problems. These methods are AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), ANP (Analytic Network Process), TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution), PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation), UTADIS (Utilities Additives Discriminantes), ELECTRE (Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realite), MAUT (Multiattribute Utility Theory), GRA (Grey Relational Analysis) etc. Teach method has some advantages compared with others (Ömürbek, Blacksmith & Akalın, 2013). Hence, to decide which MCDM method will be used for solution of the problem, factors like the nature of the problem, types of choices, measurement scales, type of uncertainty, dependency among the attributes, expectations of decision maker, and quantity and quality of the data should be considered (Tavana & Hatami-Marbini, 2011). By this study, it is aimed to develop a systematic decision process for the grant support applications that are expected to be evaluated according to their scientific adequacy by multiple evaluators under certain criteria. In this context, project evaluation process applied by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) the leading institutions in our country, was investigated. Firstly in the study, criteria that will be used on the project evaluation were decided. The main criteria were selected among TÜBİTAK evaluation criteria. These criteria were originality of project, methodology, project management/team and research opportunities and extensive impact of project. Moreover, for each main criteria, 2-4 sub criteria were defined, hence it was decided to evaluate projects over 13 sub-criterion in total. Due to superiority of determination criteria weights AHP method and provided opportunity ranking great number of alternatives TOPSIS method, they are used together. AHP method, developed by Saaty (1977), is based on selection by pairwise comparisons. Because of its simple structure and being easy to understand, AHP is the very popular method in the literature for determining criteria weights in MCDM problems. Besides, the TOPSIS method developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981) as a MCDM technique is an alternative to ELECTRE method and it is used in many areas. In the method, distance from each decision point to ideal and to negative ideal solution point was calculated by using Euclidian Distance Approach. In the study, main criteria and sub-criteria were compared on their own merits by using questionnaires that were developed based on an importance scale by four relative groups of people (i.e. TUBITAK specialists, TUBITAK managers, academics and individuals from business world ) After these pairwise comparisons, weight of the each main criteria and sub-criteria were calculated by using AHP method. Then these calculated criteria’ weights used as an input in TOPSİS method, a sample consisting 200 projects were ranked on their own merits. This new system supported to opportunity to get views of the people that take part of project process including preparation, evaluation and implementation on the evaluation of academic research projects. Moreover, instead of using four main criteria in equal weight to evaluate projects, by using weighted 13 sub-criteria and decision point’s distance from the ideal solution, systematic decision making process was developed. By this evaluation process, new approach was created to determine importance of academic research projects.

Keywords: Academic projects, Ahp method, Research projects evaluation, Topsis method.

Procedia PDF Downloads 589

Authors: Rebeca V. Tholen, Elaine Bundy

Abstract:

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). The effects of alcoholism can cause irreversible liver damage, cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant occurs in 20-50% of patients and increases the risk for recurrent cirrhosis, organ rejection, and graft failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant has been identified as a problem among liver transplant recipients at a large urban academic transplant center in the United States. Transplantation will reverse the complications of ESLD, but it does not treat underlying alcoholism or reduce the risk of relapse after transplant. The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a High-Risk Alcoholism Relapse (HRAR) Scale to screen and identify patients at high-risk for alcohol relapse after receiving an LT. Methods: The HRAR Scale is a predictive tool designed to determine the severity of alcoholism and risk of relapse after transplant. The scale consists of three variables identified as having the highest predictive power for early relapse including, daily number of drinks, history of previous inpatient treatment for alcoholism, and the number of years of heavy drinking. All adult liver transplant recipients at a large urban transplant center were screened with the HRAR Scale prior to hospital discharge. A zero to two ordinal score is ranked for each variable, and the total score ranges from zero to six. High-risk scores are between three to six. Results: Descriptive statistics revealed 25 patients were newly transplanted and discharged from the hospital during an 8-week period. 40% of patients (n=10) were identified as being high-risk for relapse and 60% low-risk (n=15). The daily number of drinks were determined by alcohol content (1 drink = 15g of ethanol) and number of drinks per day. 60% of patients reported drinking 9-17 drinks per day, and 40% reported ≤ 9 drinks. 50% of high-risk patients reported drinking ≥ 25 years, 40% for 11-25 years, and 10% ≤ 11 years. For number of inpatient treatments for alcoholism, 50% received inpatient treatment one time, 20% ≥ 1, and 30% reported never receiving inpatient treatment. Findings reveal the importance and value of a validated screening tool as a more efficient method than other screening methods alone. Integration of a structured clinical tool will help guide the drinking history portion of the psychosocial assessment. Targeted interventions can be implemented for all high-risk patients. Conclusions: Our findings validate the effectiveness of utilizing the HRAR scale to screen and identify patients who are a high-risk for alcohol relapse post-LT. Recommendations to help maintain post-transplant sobriety include starting a transplant support group within the organization for all high-risk patients. (ESLD). The effects of alcoholism can cause irreversible liver damage, cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant occurs in 20-50% of patients, and increases the risk for recurrent cirrhosis, organ rejection, and graft failure. Alcohol relapse after transplant has been identified as a problem among liver transplant recipients at a large urban academic transplant center in the United States. Transplantation will reverse the complications of ESLD, but it does not treat underlying alcoholism or reduce the risk of relapse after transplant. The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a High-Risk Alcoholism Relapse (HRAR) Scale to screen and identify patients at high-risk for alcohol relapse after receiving a LT. Methods: The HRAR Scale is a predictive tool designed to determine severity of alcoholism and risk of relapse after transplant. The scale consists of three variables identified as having the highest predictive power for early relapse including, daily number of drinks, history of previous inpatient treatment for alcoholism, and the number of years of heavy drinking. All adult liver transplant recipients at a large urban transplant center were screened with the HRAR Scale prior to hospital discharge. A zero to two ordinal score is ranked for each variable, and the total score ranges from zero to six. High-risk scores are between three to six. Results: Descriptive statistics revealed 25 patients were newly transplanted and discharged from the hospital during an 8-week period. 40% of patients (n=10) were identified as being high-risk for relapse and 60% low-risk (n=15). The daily number of drinks were determined by alcohol content (1 drink = 15g of ethanol) and number of drinks per day. 60% of patients reported drinking 9-17 drinks per day, and 40% reported ≤ 9 drinks. 50% of high-risk patients reported drinking ≥ 25 years, 40% for 11-25 years, and 10% ≤ 11 years. For number of inpatient treatments for alcoholism, 50% received inpatient treatment one time, 20% ≥ 1, and 30% reported never receiving inpatient treatment. Findings reveal the importance and value of a validated screening tool as a more efficient method than other screening methods alone. Integration of a structured clinical tool will help guide the drinking history portion of the psychosocial assessment. Targeted interventions can be implemented for all high-risk patients. Conclusions: Our findings validate the effectiveness of utilizing the HRAR scale to screen and identify patients who are a high-risk for alcohol relapse post-LT. Recommendations to help maintain post-transplant sobriety include starting a transplant support group within the organization for all high-risk patients.

Keywords: alcoholism, liver transplant, quality improvement, substance abuse

Procedia PDF Downloads 116

Authors: Jocelyn Doucet, Jean-Philippe Laviolette, Ali Eslami

Abstract:

The end-of-life management and recycling of polymer wastes remains a key environment issue in on-going efforts to increase resource efficiency and attaining GHG emission reduction targets. Half of all the plastics ever produced were made in the last 13 years, and only about 16% of that plastic waste is collected for recycling, while 25% is incinerated, 40% is landfilled, and 19% is unmanaged and leaks in the environment and waterways. In addition to the plastic collection issue, the UN recently published a report on chemicals in plastics, which adds another layer of challenge when integrating recycled content containing toxic products into new products. To tackle these important issues, innovative solutions are required. Chemical recycling of plastics provides new complementary alternatives to the current recycled plastic market by converting waste material into a high value chemical commodity that can be reintegrated in a variety of applications, making the total market size of the output – virgin-like, high value products - larger than the market size of the input – plastic waste. Access to high-quality feedstock also remains a major obstacle, primarily due to material contamination issues. Pyrowave approaches this challenge with its innovative nano-recycling technology, which purifies polymers at the molecular level, removing undesirable contaminants and restoring the resin to its virgin state without having to depolymerise it. This breakthrough approach expands the range of plastics that can be effectively recycled, including mixed plastics with various contaminants such as lead, inorganic pigments, and flame retardants. The technology allows yields below 100ppm, and purity can be adjusted to an infinitesimal level depending on the customer's specifications. The separation of the polymer and contaminants in Pyrowave's nano-recycling process offers the unique ability to customize the solution on targeted additives and contaminants to be removed based on the difference in molecular size. This precise control enables the attainment of a final polymer purity equivalent to virgin resin. The patented process involves dissolving the contaminated material using a specially formulated solvent, purifying the mixture at the molecular level, and subsequently extracting the solvent to yield a purified polymer resin that can directly be reintegrated in new products without further treatment. Notably, this technology offers simplicity, effectiveness, and flexibility while minimizing environmental impact and preserving valuable resources in the manufacturing circuit. Pyrowave has successfully applied this nano-recycling technology to decontaminate polymers and supply purified, high-quality recycled plastics to critical industries, including food-contact compliance. The technology is low-carbon, electrified, and provides 100% traceable resins with properties identical to those of virgin resins. Additionally, the issue of low recycling rates and the limited market for traditionally hard-to-recycle plastic waste has fueled the need for new complementary alternatives. Chemical recycling, such as Pyrowave's microwave depolymerization, presents a sustainable and efficient solution by converting plastic waste into high-value commodities. By employing microwave catalytic depolymerization, Pyrowave enables a truly circular economy of plastics, particularly in treating polystyrene waste to produce virgin-like styrene monomers. This revolutionary approach boasts low energy consumption, high yields, and a reduced carbon footprint. Pyrowave offers a portfolio of sustainable, low-carbon, electric solutions to give plastic waste a second life and paves the way to the new circular economy of plastics. Here, particularly for polystyrene, we show that styrene monomer yields from Pyrowave’s polystyrene microwave depolymerization reactor is 2,2 to 1,5 times higher than that of the thermal conventional pyrolysis. In addition, we provide a detailed understanding of the microwave assisted depolymerization via analyzing the effects of microwave power, pyrolysis time, microwave receptor and temperature on the styrene product yields. Furthermore, we investigate life cycle environmental impact assessment of microwave assisted pyrolysis of polystyrene in commercial-scale production. Finally, it is worth pointing out that Pyrowave is able to treat several tons of polystyrene to produce virgin styrene monomers and manage waste/contaminated polymeric materials as well in a truly circular economy.

Keywords: nanorecycling, nanomaterials, plastic recycling, depolymerization

Procedia PDF Downloads 66