Evaluation of motorized wheelchairs using an integrated ARAS-TOPSIS and CRITIC approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15649/2346030X.4013Keywords:
MultiCriteria Decision Making, CRITIC, ARAS, TOPSIS, Sensitivity Analysis, Motorized wheelchair, Assistive Product EvaluationAbstract
This research paper proposes an innovative mathematical approach for evaluating motorized wheelchairs by integrating Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method, along with the CRITIC (Criteria Importance through Intercriteria Correlation) weighting approach. By taking into account several factors at once, the integration of various approaches seeks to improve the evaluation process's accuracy and dependability. In order to handle the situation, the modelled framework takes into account 14 possible wheelchairs and 7 factors. The CRITIC weighting approach evaluates the impact of the criteria, while the TOPSIS and ARAS methodologies separately calculate the performance rating to produce an ordering of the chosen wheelchairs. Wheelchairs are evaluated using an array of factors, including recommendations from experts as well as online B2B market information. A Spearman’s correlation coefficient of 0.9696 confirms strong consistency between ARAS and TOPSIS based rankings The MW-12 variant stands out as the best option. The sensitivity evaluation was performed to test robustness of the proposed method. Practically, this integrated approach equips manufacturers with datadriven product development insights, aids healthcare providers in transparent procurement, and empowers end users and caregivers to select wheelchairs that best meet individual mobility needs.
References
[1] S. R. Avutu, S. Paul, and B. V. Reddy, “A review on wheelchair and add-in devices design for the disabled,” Int. J. Biomed. Eng. Technol., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 35-59, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBET.2023.128512.
[2] S. D. Frederick, J. Shaikh-Mohammed, G. Suresh, and S. Sujatha, “Long-term community integration study of an affordable manual standing wheelchair,” Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol., pp. 1–10, Feb. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2313083.
[3] A. Shkera and V. Patankar, “Navigating active Transit: How built environments shape commuting and leisure journeys,” Case Stud. Transp. Policy., vol. 15, pp. 101161–101161, Mar. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2024.101161.
[4] L. Fishleigh, R. Taylor, G. Hale,and D. S. Bowers, “Factors that affect powered wheelchair use for an adult population: a systematic review,” Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol., pp. 1–14, jan 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2304122.
[5] H. Gheibdoust, S. Gilaninia, and M. Taleghani, “Identification and Prioritization of the Factors Influencing Service Quality in the Hotel Industry by SWARA and ARAS Methods During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, pp. 1–23, May 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008x.2023.2209343.
[6] J. Antunes, Abdollah Hadi-Vencheh, A. Jamshidi, Y. Tan, and P. Wanke, “TEA-IS: A hybrid DEA-TOPSIS approach for assessing performance and synergy in Chinese health care,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 171, pp. 113916–113916, Aug. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2022.113916.
[7] M. A. Beheshtinia, F. Bahrami, M. Fathi, and S. Asadi,” Evaluating and prioritizing the healthcare waste disposal center locations using a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method,” Sci. Rep., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 15130, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-42455-w.
[8] G. Boonsothonsatit, S. Vongbunyong, N. Chonsawat and W. Chanpuypetch, "Development of a Hybrid AHP-TOPSIS Decision-Making Framework for Technology Selection in Hospital Medication Dispensing Processes," in IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 2500-2516, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3348754.
[9] W. Chen, S. Zeng, and E. Zhang, “Fermatean Fuzzy IWP-TOPSIS-GRA Multi-Criteria Group Analysis and Its Application to Healthcare Waste Treatment Technology Evaluation,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 6056–6056, Mar. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076056.
[10] Ö. Deretarla, B. Erdebilli, and M. Gündoğan, “An integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process and Complex Proportional Assessment for vendor selection in supply chain management,” Decis. Anal. J., vol. 6, p. 100155, Mar. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100155.
[11] M. A. Nafteh and M. Shahrokhi, “Improving the COPRAS Multicriteria Group Decision-Making Method for Selecting a Sustainable Supplier Using Intuitionistic and Fuzzy Type 2 Sets,” Jordan J. Mech. Ind. Eng., vol. 17, no. 02, pp. 219–232, Jun. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.59038/jjmie/170206.
[12] D. Ghose, S. Pradhan, P. Tamuli, and Shabbiruddin, “Optimal material for solar electric vehicle application using an integrated Fuzzy-COPRAS model,” Energy Sources Part A Recover. Util. Environ. Eff., pp. 1–20, Sep. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2019.1668879.
[13] Y. Wang, W. Wang, Z. Wang, M. Deveci, S. K. Roy, and S. Kadry, “Selection of sustainable food suppliers using the Pythagorean fuzzy CRITIC-MARCOS method,” Inf. Sci., vol. 664, pp. 120326–120326, Apr. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2024.120326.
[14] K. KARA, G. C. YALÇIN, and S. EDİNSEL, “Warehouse Manager Selection by CRITIC-MULTIMOORA Hybrid Method based on Single-Valued Neutrosophic Sets,” J. Marit. Transp. Logist., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 48-64, Dec. 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.52602/mtl.1220345.
[15] A. Menekşe and H. C. Akdağ, “Medical waste disposal planning for healthcare units using spherical fuzzy CRITIC-WASPAS,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 144, pp. 110480–110480, Sep. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110480.
[16] S. Mete, M. Yucesan, M. Gul, and E. Ozceylan, “An integrated hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate countries’ COVID-19 risks,” Socio-Econ. Plann. Sci., vol. 90, pp. 101744–101744, Dec. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101744.
[17] J. Sun, H. Wang, and Z. Cui, “Alleviating the Bauxite Maritime Supply Chain Risks through Resilient Strategies: QFD-MCDM with Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision Approach,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 8244–8244, May 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108244.
[18] R. Yadav, M. Singh, A. Meena, Sang Soo Lee, and S. Park, “Selection and ranking of dental restorative composite materials using hybrid Entropy-VIKOR method: An application of MCDM technique,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., vol. 147, pp. 106103–106103, Nov. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.106103.
[19] A. R. Mishra, P. Rani, D. Pamucar, I. M. Hezam, and A. Saha, “Entropy and discrimination measures based q-rung orthopair fuzzy MULTIMOORA framework for selecting solid waste disposal method,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 30, no. 5, pp.12988-13011, Sep. 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22734-1.
[20] M. R. Z. Banadkouki, “Selection of strategies to improve energy efficiency in industry: A hybrid approach using entropy weight method and fuzzy TOPSIS,” Energy, vol. 279, p. 128070, Sep. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128070.
[21] M. O. Esangbedo and J. H Wei, “Grey hybrid normalization with period based entropy weighting and relational analysis for cities rankings,” Sci. Rep., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 13797, Aug. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40954-4.
[22] S. K. Sahoo and B. B. Choudhury, “Optimal selection of an electric power wheelchair using an integrated COPRAS and EDAS approach based on Entropy weighting technique,” Decis. Sci. Lett., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 21–34, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2021.10.002.
[23] M. J. Haddad and D. A. Sanders, “Selecting a Best Compromise Direction for a Powered Wheelchair Using PROMETHEE,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 228–235, Feb. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/tnsre.2019.2892587.
[24] M. Z. Mistarihi, R. A. Okour, and A. A. Mumani, “An integration of a QFD model with Fuzzy-ANP approach for determining the importance weights for engineering characteristics of the proposed wheelchair design,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 90, p. 106136, May 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106136.
[25] V. Delcroix, K. Sedki, and F.-X. Lepoutre, “A Bayesian network for recurrent multi-criteria and multi-attribute decision problems: Choosing a manual wheelchair,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 2541–2551, Jun. 2013, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.065.
[26] S. K. Sahoo and B. B. Choudhury, “Evaluating Material Alternatives for low cost Robotic Wheelchair Chassis: A Combined CRITIC, EDAS, and COPRAS Framework,” Jordan J. Mech. Ind. Eng., vol. 17, no. 04, pp. 653–669, Dec. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.59038/jjmie/170419.
[27] S. K. Sahoo and B. B. Choudhury, “A Fuzzy AHP Approach to Evaluate the Strategic Design Criteria of a Smart Robotic Powered Wheelchair Prototype,” Intell. Syst. Proc. ICMIB Springer Singapore, pp. 451–464, Jan. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6081-5_40.
[28] I. M. Hezam, P. Rani, A. R. Mishra, and A. Alshamrani, “Assessment of autonomous smart wheelchairs for disabled persons using hybrid interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy combined compromise solution method,” Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess., vol. 57, p. 103169, Jun. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2023.103169.
[29] J. Chwat, A. Marzec-Przyszlak, P. Szafik, M. Koperska, A. Stabon, A. Guzik-Kopyto, and R. Michnik, “Multi-criteria Analysis of Three 3D Canine Wheelchair Models with the Prototype Development,” Innov. Biomed. Eng., vol. 875, pp. 3-10, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52382-3_1.
[30] D. Diakoulaki, G. Mavrotas, and L. Papayannakis, “Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method,” Comput. Oper. Res., vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 763–770, Aug. 1995, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H.
[31] E. K. Zavadskas and Z. Turskis, “A NEW ADDITIVE RATIO ASSESSMENT (ARAS) METHOD IN MULTICRITERIA DECISION‐MAKING / NAUJAS ADITYVINIS KRITERIJŲ SANTYKIŲ ĮVERTINIMO METODAS (ARAS) DAUGIAKRITERINIAMS UŽDAVINIAMS SPRĘSTI,” Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 159–172, Jun. 2010, doi: https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.10.
[32] C.L. Hwang,and A. S. M. Masud, “Multiple objective decision making—methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey,” Springer Science & Business Media. Vol. 164, 2012.
[33] A. Bhattacharya, B. Sarkar, and S. K. Mukherjee, “Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective,” Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 43, no. 17, pp. 3671–3685, Sep. 2005, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540500137217.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 AiBi Journal of Research, Administration and Engineering
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The journal offers open access under a Creative Commons Attibution License
This work is under license Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0).
