Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Basílio, Márcio
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Pereira, Valdecy, Costa, Helder Gomes, Santos, Marcos dos, Ghosh, Amartya
Tipo de documento: preprint
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: SciELO Preprints
Texto Completo: https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576
Resumo: Purpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research.
id SCI-1_58364f99aa675b5e8b3a34734e7c5eea
oai_identifier_str oai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/3576
network_acronym_str SCI-1
network_name_str SciELO Preprints
repository_id_str
spelling Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 yearsMulticriteriaMCDAMCDMbibliometric analysisAHPTOPSISVIKORPROMETHEEANPPurpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research.SciELO PreprintsSciELO PreprintsSciELO Preprints2022-03-21info:eu-repo/semantics/preprintinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/357610.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576enghttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/3576/7017Copyright (c) 2022 Márcio Basílio, Valdecy Pereira, Helder Gomes Costa, Marcos dos Santos, Amartya Ghoshhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBasílio, MárcioPereira, ValdecyCosta, Helder GomesSantos, Marcos dosGhosh, Amartyareponame:SciELO Preprintsinstname:SciELOinstacron:SCI2022-03-14T03:19:38Zoai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/3576Servidor de preprintshttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scieloONGhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/oaiscielo.submission@scielo.orgopendoar:2022-03-14T03:19:38SciELO Preprints - SciELOfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
title Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
spellingShingle Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
Basílio, Márcio
Multicriteria
MCDA
MCDM
bibliometric analysis
AHP
TOPSIS
VIKOR
PROMETHEE
ANP
title_short Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
title_full Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
title_fullStr Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
title_full_unstemmed Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
title_sort Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
author Basílio, Márcio
author_facet Basílio, Márcio
Pereira, Valdecy
Costa, Helder Gomes
Santos, Marcos dos
Ghosh, Amartya
author_role author
author2 Pereira, Valdecy
Costa, Helder Gomes
Santos, Marcos dos
Ghosh, Amartya
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Basílio, Márcio
Pereira, Valdecy
Costa, Helder Gomes
Santos, Marcos dos
Ghosh, Amartya
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Multicriteria
MCDA
MCDM
bibliometric analysis
AHP
TOPSIS
VIKOR
PROMETHEE
ANP
topic Multicriteria
MCDA
MCDM
bibliometric analysis
AHP
TOPSIS
VIKOR
PROMETHEE
ANP
description Purpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-03-21
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format preprint
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576
10.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576
url https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/3576/7017
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv SciELO Preprints
SciELO Preprints
SciELO Preprints
publisher.none.fl_str_mv SciELO Preprints
SciELO Preprints
SciELO Preprints
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:SciELO Preprints
instname:SciELO
instacron:SCI
instname_str SciELO
instacron_str SCI
institution SCI
reponame_str SciELO Preprints
collection SciELO Preprints
repository.name.fl_str_mv SciELO Preprints - SciELO
repository.mail.fl_str_mv scielo.submission@scielo.org
_version_ 1797047827169280000