Search results for: collaborative environmental management framework

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 590

Authors: David J. Foran, Nhan Do, Samuel Ajjarapu, Wenjin Chen, Tahsin Kurc, Joel H. Saltz

Abstract:

The large-scale data and computational requirements of investigators throughout the clinical and research communities demand an informatics infrastructure that supports both existing and new investigative and translational projects in a robust, secure environment. In some subspecialties of medicine and research, the capacity to generate data has outpaced the methods and technology used to aggregate, organize, access, and reliably retrieve this information. Leading health care centers now recognize the utility of establishing an enterprise-wide, clinical data warehouse. The primary benefits that can be realized through such efforts include cost savings, efficient tracking of outcomes, advanced clinical decision support, improved prognostic accuracy, and more reliable clinical trials matching. The overarching objective of the work presented here is the development and implementation of a flexible Intelligent Retrieval and Interrogation System (IRIS) that exploits the combined use of computational imaging, genomics, and data-mining capabilities to facilitate clinical assessments and translational research in oncology. The proposed System includes a multi-modal, Clinical & Research Data Warehouse (CRDW) that is tightly integrated with a suite of computational and machine-learning tools to provide insight into the underlying tumor characteristics that are not be apparent by human inspection alone. A key distinguishing feature of the System is a configurable Extract, Transform and Load (ETL) interface that enables it to adapt to different clinical and research data environments. This project is motivated by the growing emphasis on establishing Learning Health Systems in which cyclical hypothesis generation and evidence evaluation become integral to improving the quality of patient care. To facilitate iterative prototyping and optimization of the algorithms and workflows for the System, the team has already implemented a fully functional Warehouse that can reliably aggregate information originating from multiple data sources including EHR’s, Clinical Trial Management Systems, Tumor Registries, Biospecimen Repositories, Radiology PAC systems, Digital Pathology archives, Unstructured Clinical Documents, and Next Generation Sequencing services. The System enables physicians to systematically mine and review the molecular, genomic, image-based, and correlated clinical information about patient tumors individually or as part of large cohorts to identify patterns that may influence treatment decisions and outcomes. The CRDW core system has facilitated peer-reviewed publications and funded projects, including an NIH-sponsored collaboration to enhance the cancer registries in Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, and New York, with machine-learning based classifications and quantitative pathomics, feature sets. The CRDW has also resulted in a collaboration with the Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to develop algorithms and workflows to automate the analysis of lung adenocarcinoma. Those studies showed that combining computational nuclear signatures with traditional WHO criteria through the use of deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) led to improved discrimination among tumor growth patterns. The team has also leveraged the Warehouse to support studies to investigate the potential of utilizing a combination of genomic and computational imaging signatures to characterize prostate cancer. The results of those studies show that integrating image biomarkers with genomic pathway scores is more strongly correlated with disease recurrence than using standard clinical markers.

Keywords: clinical data warehouse, decision support, data-mining, intelligent databases, machine-learning.

Procedia PDF Downloads 127