Additional file 1 of Prioritisation for future surveillance, prevention and control of 98 communicable diseases in Belgium: a 2018 multi-criteria decision analysis study
Additional file 1 Table S1: Answer categories and their scaling. Figure S1: Median weights of the 18 individual criteria per profession. Figure S2: CART decision tree. Figure S3: Definition of priority groups (A) by CART methods and (B) by visual inspection. Figure S4: Composition of the final score for diseases. Figure S5: Bump chart with ranking of diseases, comparing the analysis scenarios. Figure S6: PCA loading plots. Figure S7: PCA based on the 18 individual criteria, with the 98 diseases plotted. Figure S8: Correlogram of the 18 individual criteria, based on the 98 diseases. Table S2: N... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Text |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2021 |
Schlagwörter: | Medicine / Biotechnology / Sociology / Cancer / Science Policy / Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified / Infectious diseases / Prioritisation / MCDA / Allocation of resources / Ranking / Burden of disease / Health domains / Expert perspectives / Surveillance priorities / Public health action |
Sprache: | unknown |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-28953164 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13632863.v1 |
Additional file 1 Table S1: Answer categories and their scaling. Figure S1: Median weights of the 18 individual criteria per profession. Figure S2: CART decision tree. Figure S3: Definition of priority groups (A) by CART methods and (B) by visual inspection. Figure S4: Composition of the final score for diseases. Figure S5: Bump chart with ranking of diseases, comparing the analysis scenarios. Figure S6: PCA loading plots. Figure S7: PCA based on the 18 individual criteria, with the 98 diseases plotted. Figure S8: Correlogram of the 18 individual criteria, based on the 98 diseases. Table S2: Number of non-blank responses per individual criteria and per disease group. Figure S9: Comparison with burden of disease study 2018. Figure S10: Comparison with German prioritisation study 2011