Skip to main content

Table 3 Scenario analyses: eight alternative analysis scenarios and the resulting impact on the composition of the top-20 ranked diseases

From: Prioritisation for future surveillance, prevention and control of 98 communicable diseases in Belgium: a 2018 multi-criteria decision analysis study

ID Study step Scenario name Description Impact on top-20 priority classificationa
A – Default The default analysis scenario, including hierarchical weighting from all professions without future risks considered. Reference
B Criteria selection Future risk Accounts for the additional criterion ‘future risk’. 1/20
C Weighting Epidemiologists Weighting according to profession: epidemiologists. 2/20
D Weighting Clinicians Weighting according to profession: clinicians. 0/20
E Weighting Microbiologists Weighting according to profession: microbiologists. 0/20
F Weighting Consistent respondents Weighting that only takes into account responses with valid validation answers. 0/20
G Weighting Non-hierarchical Weighting Non-hierarchical weighting: not accounting for the number of criteria within a criteria group. 6/20
H Scoring Quantification of answer categories Alternative set of quantifications representing answer categories of the scoring survey (Table S1). 6/20
  1. aNumber of diseases originally found in the top-20 ranked diseases that got replaced in the alternative scenario.
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us