Comparison of different approaches applied in Analytic Hierarchy Process – an example of information needs of patients with rare diseases

Abstract

BackgroundThe Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is increasingly used to measure patient priorities. Studies have shown that there are several different approaches to data acquisition and data aggregation. The aim of this study was to measure the information needs of patients having a rare disease and to analyze the effects of these different AHP approaches. The ranking of information needs is then used to display information categories on a web-based information portal about rare diseases according to the patient’s priorities.MethodsThe information needs of patients suffering from rare diseases were identified by an Internet research study and a preliminary qualitative study. Hence, we designed a three-level hierarchy containing 13 criteria. For data acquisition, the differences in outcomes were investigated using individual versus group judgements separately. Furthermore, we analyzed the different effects when using the median and arithmetic and geometric means for data aggregation. A consistency ratio ≤0.2 was determined to represent an acceptable consistency level.ResultsForty individual and three group judgements were collected from patients suffering from a rare disease and their close relatives. The consistency ratio of 31 individual and three group judgements was acceptable and thus these judgements were included in the study. To a large extent, the local ranks for individual and group judgements were similar. Interestingly, group judgements were in a significantly smaller range than individual judgements. According to our data, the ranks of the criteria differed slightly according to the data aggregation method used.ConclusionsIt is important to explain and justify the choice of an appropriate method for data acquisition because response behaviors differ according to the method. We conclude that researchers should select a suitable method based on the thematic perspective or investigated topics in the study. Because the arithmetic mean is very vulnerable to outliers, the geometric mean and the median seem to be acceptable alternatives for data aggregation. Overall, using the AHP to identify patient priorities and enhance the user-friendliness of information websites offers an important contribution to medical informatics.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0346-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Ball is in Your Court: Agenda for Research to Advance the Science of Patient Preferences in the Regulatory Review of Medical Devices in the United States

“…This is especially the case when comparing methods that come from different research disciplines, such as economics, decision science, psychology, market research, and health services research. We are aware of some recent and ongoing work in this area [26][27][28]; however, further research and potentially a theoretical approach are necessary.…”

Rare Diseases on the Internet: An Assessment of the Quality of Online Information

“…Information about psychosocial counseling and the desire to have children and/or family planning are rarely presented on the websites containing information about rare diseases. Nevertheless, both are important information categories for patients suffering from a rare disease [ 26 , 33 ] and their relatives because 80% of all rare diseases have genetic causes [ 18 ]. Genetic questions are in line with questions about family planning and genetic theory.…”

Midterm Fire Danger Prediction Using Satellite Imagery and Auxiliary Thematic Layers

“…The validity of the latter has been confirmed by calculating the so-called consistency ratio (CR), the most well-known measure employed to quantify the consistency of the comparison matrix in AHP [66,67]. In our case, the CR was calculated as 0.17, which is considered acceptable [68][69][70][71]. Therefore, no further reevaluation of the expert's judgments was performed, and the comparison matrix was considered as acceptable.…”