The DOI matches its Crossref record; 165 of the 170 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“It has become one of the most prominent methods for solving MCDM problems59,60.”
From A decision-support framework for evaluating AI-enabled ESG strategies in the context of sustainable manufacturing systems (2025) · cites this paper as [59]
Citations
Cites
Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 · Cited by 21,484
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Saaty, T. L. (1990) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-i · Cited by 9,605
Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications
Chen, S.-J. J., Hwang, C. L., Beckmann, M. J., & Krelle, W. E. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 8,207
IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global estimates for the prevalence of diabetes for 2015 and 2040
Ogurtsova, K., Fernandes, J. D. D. R., Huang, Y., Linnenkamp, U., Guariguata, L., Cho, N. H., Cavan, D. A., Shaw, J. E., & Makaroff, L. (2017) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2017.03.024 · Cited by 7,138
The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used
Saaty, R. W. (1987) · Mathematical Modelling · doi:10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8 · Cited by 5,380
Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS
Opricović, S., & Tzeng, G. (2003) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00020-1 · Cited by 5,211
Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.07-9492lsf · Cited by 5,039
Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2013 and projections for 2035
Guariguata, L., Whiting, D. R., Hambleton, I., Beagley, J., Linnenkamp, U., & Shaw, J. E. (2014) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2013.11.002 · Cited by 4,642
Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys
Figueira, J. R., Greco, S., & Ehrogott, M. (2005) · International series in management science/operations research/International series in operations research & management science · doi:10.1007/b100605 · Cited by 4,594
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Chen, 1992, Vol. 375
- Elsevier, 2016
- Hwang, 2012, Vol. 281
- Yoon, 1995, Vol. 104
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Effects of the entropy weight on TOPSIS
Chen, P. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114186 · Cited by 591
Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method
Chen, P. (2019) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.035 · Cited by 415
An in-depth review of theory of the TOPSIS method: An experimental analysis
Çelikbilek, Y., & Tüysüz, F. (2020) · Journal of Management Analytics · doi:10.1080/23270012.2020.1748528 · Cited by 367
Ahani, A., Nilashi, M., Yadegaridehkordi, E., Sanzogni, L., Rashid, T. A., Knox, K., Samad, S., & Ibrahim, O. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.06.014 · Cited by 276
A comprehensive analysis of weighting and multicriteria methods in the context of sustainable energy
Şahin, M. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1007/s13762-020-02922-7 · Cited by 240
Metadata
- Authors
- Zyoud, S. H., & Fuchs-Hanusch, D.
- Affiliations
- Graz University of Technology (AT)
- Corresponding author
- Zyoud, Shaher H.
- Venue
- Expert Systems with Applications
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-07
- Volume
- 78
- Pages
- 158-181
- ISSN
- 0957-4174 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2586123156
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 170
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 9
- FWCI
- 44.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Expert Systems with Applications (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Decision Support System Applications
- Keywords
- analytic hierarchy process, TOPSIS, multi-criteria decision making, research trends, research collaboration, geographic information systems, supply chain management, sustainability, risk modeling, expert systems, bibliometric visualization, h-index, research hotspots, decision support system, China research output
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
