Search results for: forms from nature

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 582

Authors: Alba Prats-Bisbe, Jaume López-Carballo, David Leno-Colorado, Alberto García Molina, Alicia Romero Marquez, Elena Hernández Pena, Eloy Opisso Salleras, Raimon Jané Campos

Abstract:

Neurological disorders are a leading cause of disability and premature mortality worldwide. Neurorehabilitation (NRHB) is a clinical process aimed at reducing functional impairment, promoting societal participation, and improving the quality of life for affected individuals. Virtual reality (VR) technology is emerging as a promising NRHB support tool. Its immersive nature fosters a strong sense of agency and embodiment, motivating patients to engage in meaningful tasks and increasing adherence to therapy. However, the clinical benefits of VR interventions are challenging to determine due to the high heterogeneity among health applications. This study explores a stepwise development approach for creating VR-based tools to assist individuals with neurological disorders in medical practice, aiming to enhance reproducibility, facilitate comparison, and promote the generalization of findings. Building on previous research, the step-by-step methodology encompasses: Needs Identification– conducting cross-disciplinary meetings to brainstorm problems, solutions, and address barriers. Intervention Definition– target population, set goals, and conceptualize the VR system (equipment and environments). Material Selection and Placement– choose appropriate hardware and software, place the device within the hospital setting, and test equipment. Co-design– collaboratively create VR environments, user interfaces, and data management strategies. Prototyping– develop VR prototypes, conduct user testing, and make iterative redesigns. Usability and Feasibility Assessment– design protocols and conduct trials with stakeholders in the hospital setting. Efficacy Assessment– conduct clinical trials to evaluate outcomes and long-term effects. Cost-Effectiveness Validation– assess reproducibility, sustainability, and balance between costs and benefits. NRHB is complex due to the multifaceted needs of patients and the interdisciplinary healthcare architecture. VR has the potential to support various applications, such as motor skill training, cognitive tasks, pain management, unilateral spatial neglect (diagnosis and treatment), mirror therapy, and ecologically valid activities of daily living. Following this methodology was crucial for launching a VR-based system in a real hospital environment. Collaboration with neuropsychologists lead to develop A) a VR-based tool for cognitive rehabilitation in patients with acquired brain injury (ABI). The system comprises a head-mounted display (HTC Vive Pro Eye) and 7 tasks targeting attention, memory, and executive functions. A desktop application facilitates session configuration, while database records in-game variables. The VR tool's usability and feasibility were demonstrated in proof-of-concept trials with 20 patients, and effectiveness is being tested through a clinical protocol with 12 patients completing 24-session treatment. Another case involved collaboration with nurses and paediatric physiatrists to create B) a VR-based distraction tool during invasive techniques. The goal is to alleviate pain and anxiety associated with botulinum toxin (BTX) injections, blood tests, or intravenous placements. An all-in-one headset (HTC Vive Focus 3) deploys 360º videos to improve the experience for paediatric patients and their families. This study presents a framework for developing clinically relevant and technologically feasible VR-based support tools for hospital settings. Despite differences in patient type, intervention purpose, and VR system, the methodology demonstrates usability, viability, reproducibility and preliminary clinical benefits. It highlights the importance approach centred on clinician and patient needs for any aspect of NRHB within a real hospital setting.

Keywords: neurological disorders, neurorehabilitation, stepwise development approach, virtual reality

Procedia PDF Downloads 5