scholarly journals The Holistic Approach to Urban Mobility Planning with a Modified Focus Group, SWOT, and Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 6599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uroš Kramar ◽  
Dejan Dragan ◽  
Darja Topolšek
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Urban Mobility ◽  
Analytical Hierarchical Process ◽  
Mobility System

The urban mobility system is an important factor in social development and must, therefore, be tackled in a way that enables balanced, sustainable development. The purpose of the present work was to introduce a new holistic approach to urban mobility system (UMS) planning, which involves a strategic decision-making process with a broad involvement of various stakeholders. For this purpose, an innovative model was created by synthesizing the focus group (FG) method with the nominal group technique (NGT), SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, and the fuzzy analytical hierarchical process (FAHP) method. The fuzzy approach was chosen for its ability to incorporate imprecise and vague information and make a decision-making UMS process more realistic. Accordingly, the objective of the paper was to propose a newly developed model that will (considering the integration of various urban mobility subsystems) enable the detection, identification, and ranking of key priorities required for a more holistic approach to UMS planning. The results revealed that the developed integrated model enables acquired areas to be ranked according to priorities, which further allows the development of scenarios. Moreover, the model allows a better understanding of how to search for compromises when one is faced with multi-criteria decision-making and coordination of frequently contradictory goals. A new integrated urban mobility model, as proposed herein, was also successfully tested in a real-life application, which proves its potential for use in sustainable urban mobility planning in a holistic way.

scholarly journals Comparison of decision-making approaches to prioritization of clean air action plans for sustainable development

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 257-268
Author(s):  
Ahmet Çalık
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Air Pollution ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Fuzzy Ahp ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Action Plans ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clean Air

Background: Clean air action plans have been prepared and are still being implemented in Turkey to control and prevent air pollution, and improve the air quality. The plans reveal a picture of the current situation and available inventory information. However, in order to implement the identified plans in real life, they need to be prioritized. This study aimed to identify and prioritize clean air action plans for Turkey using a framework of both fuzzy and crisp evaluations. Methods: In this study, priorities of the plans were identified and analyzed with a decision-making model. A three-step research methodology was provided. First, literature was reviewed regarding sustainable development and action plans. Second, in order to narrow and specify action plans, the nominal group technique (NGT) was implemented. Finally, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and best-worst method (BWM) surveys were applied to environmental engineers and experts working on sustainable development to prioritize the action plans. Results: It was revealed that heating dimension is considered as the most important criterion with the weight of 0.7469 in fuzzy AHP and 0.758 in BWM. AP1 with a weight of 0.3356 in fuzzy AHP and AP3 with a weight of 0.3289 in BWM were the most important sub-criteria, which are the plans for reducing coal use ranked at the forefront in reducing air pollution. Conclusion: According to the results, there is no significant difference in the priority ranking results. The results of fuzzy AHP and BWM are very similar. For example, traffic criterion has the best performance in both methods in the evaluation of decision makers. In addition, the main and sub-criteria with the lowest priority are the same in these two methods

scholarly journals Parent engagement in co-design of clinical trials: the PARENT trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leigh M. Vanderloo ◽  
Shelley M. Vanderhout ◽  
Erika Tavares ◽  
Jonathon Maguire ◽  
Sharon Straus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Patient Engagement ◽  
Parent Engagement ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Potential Barriers ◽  
Patient Engagement In Research ◽  
Diverse Individual ◽  
Parent Trial

AbstractEvidence generated from partnering with parents to design and conduct research together may be used to refine, adjust, and modify future research approaches. This study aimed to describe the initial approaches to parent engagement in the design of the PARENT trial as well as understand parent perspectives on the acceptability and relevance of the PARENT trial and potential barriers and facilitators to participation.Parents participating in the TARGet Kids! cohort were invited to participate in a focus group, called the PARENT panel, to co-design the PARENT trial. This focus group was conducted to capture diverse individual and collective parents’ experiences. Overall methodological approaches for the PARENT panel were informed by the CIHR Strategy for Patient Oriented Research (SPOR) guiding principles (mutual respect, co-building, inclusiveness, and support) for patient engagement in research, and facilitated through the Knowledge Translation Program in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute at Unity Health Toronto. Using a Nominal Group Technique, the PARENT panel provided feedback on the feasibility, relevance, and acceptability of the proposed intervention. Findings from this work will be used to further refine, adjust, and modify the next iteration of the PARENT trial, which will also serve as an opportunity to discuss the efforts made by researchers to incorporate parent suggestions and what additional steps are required for improved patient engagement.

scholarly journals Nominal Group Technique: a Brainstorming Tool for Identifying Learning Activities Using Musical Instruments to Enhance Creativity and Imagination of Young Children.

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Abdul Talib Hashim ◽  
Azli Ariffin ◽  
Abdul Razalli ◽  
Abd Aziz Shukor ◽  
Mohd Nizamnasrifan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Musical Instruments ◽  
Learning Activities ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Group Meeting ◽  
Creativity Development ◽  
Focus Group Meeting ◽  
Group Technique

The purpose of this study is to identify consensus by experts on appropriate activities to enhance the development of preschool children's imagination through the use of musical instruments. In order to obtain an in-depth understanding of teachers’ conceptions on imagination in creativity development and their beliefs about the best way to promote imagination in the classroom, the nominal group technique (NGT) was used to structure each focus group meeting. Finding shows a list of activities that have been sorted according to ranking as determined by the experts. All the experts also believe that the list of activities can boost the child's imagination because such activities have the characteristics that suit well with children.

EP.TH.602Exploring decision-making of healthcare professionals in patients with benign large non-pedunculated colonic polyps (BLNPCP) virtually using combined focus group and nominal group technique

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Wheldon ◽  
J Morgan ◽  
MJ Lee ◽  
S Riley ◽  
SR Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Healthcare Professional ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Colonic Polyps ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Factors ◽  
Group Technique

Abstract Aim We aimed to elicit key factors that influence healthcare professional decision-making when deciding treatment for BLNPCP. Background Benign large non-pedunculated colonic polyps (BLNPCP) may harbour covert malignancy and opinions differ about the optimal treatment modality. There are several options available, including endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal resection, combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery and surgical resection. Despite widespread availability of endoscopic resection techniques, there are high rates of surgery in the UK. Methods Three focus groups of healthcare professionals, comprised of either consultant colorectal surgeons, nurse endoscopists and consultant gastroenterologists, were conducted virtually utilising the Nominal Group Technique. Meetings were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes were devolved using the framework approach for qualitative analysis. A priority-ranked list of factors influencing healthcare professional decision-making in this setting was generated. Results Five main themes were identified as influencing decision-making: Shared decision making (patient preference, informed consent); Patient factors (co-morbidity, age, life-expectancy); Polyp factors (Location, size, morphology, risk of cancer); Healthcare professionals (skill-set, personal preference); System factors (techniques availability locally, regional referral networks). Nominal Group Technique generated 55 items across the three focus groups. Nurses and gastroentologists ranked patient factors (particularly drug history and tolerance of procedure) and shared decision making (patient preference) more highly then surgeons. Surgeons placed greater emphasis on polyp factors particularly location and the risk of submucosal invasive carcinoma. Conclusion Decision making is complex and multifactorial. These results support the benefits of complex polyp MDTs and patient involvement in the decision-making. The complexity of decision-making may underpin wide variation in practice.

scholarly journals Community Priority Index: utility, applicability and validation for priority setting in community-based participatory research

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamisu M. Salihu ◽  
Abraham A. Salinas-Miranda ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
DeAnne Turner ◽  
Estrellita Lo Berry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Community Settings ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Priority Index

<em>Background</em>. Providing practitioners with an intuitive measure for priority setting that can be combined with diverse data collection methods is a necessary step to foster accountability of the decision-making process in community settings. Yet, there is a lack of easy-to-use, but methodologically robust measures, that can be feasibly implemented for reliable decision-making in community settings. To address this important gap in community based participatory research (CBPR), the purpose of this study was to demonstrate the utility, applicability, and validation of a community priority index in a community-based participatory research setting. <br /><em>Design and Methods</em>. Mixed-method study that combined focus groups findings, nominal group technique with six key informants, and the generation of a Community Priority Index (CPI) that integrated community importance, changeability, and target populations. Bootstrapping and simulation were performed for validation. <br /><em>Results</em>. For pregnant mothers, the top three highly important and highly changeable priorities were: stress (CPI=0.85; 95%CI: 0.70, 1.00), lack of affection (CPI=0.87; 95%CI: 0.69, 1.00), and nutritional issues (CPI=0.78; 95%CI: 0.48, 1.00). For non-pregnant women, top priorities were: low health literacy (CPI=0.87; 95%CI: 0.69, 1.00), low educational attainment (CPI=0.78; 95%CI: 0.48, 1.00), and lack of self-esteem (CPI=0.72; 95%CI: 0.44, 1.00). For children and adolescents, the top three priorities were: obesity (CPI=0.88; 95%CI: 0.69, 1.00), low self-esteem (CPI=0.81; 95%CI: 0.69, 0.94), and negative attitudes toward education (CPI=0.75; 95%CI: 0.50, 0.94). <br /><em>Conclusions</em>. This study demonstrates the applicability of the CPI as a simple and intuitive measure for priority setting in CBPR.

Decision-making in the management of property investment by Australian superannuation funds

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiffany Hutcheson ◽  
Graeme Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Real Estate ◽  
Investment Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Investment Portfolio ◽  
Analytical Hierarchical Process ◽  
Heterogeneous Nature ◽  
Decision Making Factors ◽  
Asset Classes

Decision-making in property investment by superannuation funds is an important investment decision, but it is different to their decision-making on other asset classes included in their asset portfolios. The large value and heterogeneous nature of individual pieces of real estate make the market for real estate relatively illiquid and subject to larger transaction costs than other asset classes. Based on interview surveys of Australian superannuation funds, using the analytical hierarchical process (AHP), we identified strategic decision-making as being the most important factor used by the superannuation funds when making decisions on the management of their property investment portfolio. Comments during the interviews indicated that their decisions were influenced by restrictions in their fund’s investment mandate and the level of funds that they had to invest. The AHP technique has allowed this research to provide a more in-depth understanding of the management of decision-making factors than previous surveys.

Triage: A new group technique gaining recognition in evaluation

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Gervais ◽  
Geneviève Pépin
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Production Phase ◽  
Usual Process ◽  
Collective Production ◽  
Validation Of Results ◽  
Group Technique

TRIAGE, or Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts, is an inductive and structured method for collecting information that aims to obtain a group consensus. The goal of this technique is to provide quality informative material quickly and efficiently to enable decision-making or to develop more sophisticated survey tools. TRIAGE both distinguishes itself from, and complements, the main group techniques used in evaluation up until now. These are the Delphi technique, the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and the focus group (Delbecq, Van de Ven & Gustafson, 1975). The definition, the context for use as well as the different parts of the usual process of TRIAGE technique (recruiting of participants, individual production phase, collective production phase with visual support, validation of results) will firstly be presented then compared to these advocated in the Delphi, NGT and focus group techniques. Also, examples of TRIAGE being applied in different evaluation contexts, such as the development of measurement instruments and the evaluation of health programs, will be presented. These examples will illustrate the richness, the flexibility and the potential of this technique as an assessment tool. Finally, the strengths and shortcomings of TRIAGE will be discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document