检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:谢泰[1] 刘晓荣[1] 贺祥[2] 沙琨[2] 董巧儿[3]
机构地区:[1]第二军医大学卫勤系,上海200433 [2]第二军医大学训练部,上海200433 [3]第二军医大学校务部,上海200433
出 处:《医疗卫生装备》2014年第2期16-18,共3页Chinese Medical Equipment Journal
基 金:军队"十二五"专项课题(2011YY027);军事医学计量科研专项课题(2011-JL2-031)
摘 要:目的:针对军队卫生装备保障效能评估需求,总结概括了当前保障效能评估的基本方法。方法:通过文献回顾,重点对层次分析法、WSEIAC模型法、模糊综合评判法、灰色关联度评估法的基本原理、优缺点和使用范围进行总结。结果:通过建立模型和运用数学方法进行运算,以上4种方法在给定的环境和空间条件下都可以作为量化工具进行评估。结论:卫生装备保障效能评估过程中,需要联合使用多种方法,以弥补各自的缺点和不足。Objective To summarize the common methods for medical equipment support effectiveness evaluation. Methods Literature analysis was performed to discuss the principles, advantages, disadvantages and use range of some methods including AHP, WSEIAC, Fuzzy Comprehensive Appraisal and Grey Incidence Degree. Results These four methods were operated with model building and mathematical techniques and could be as quantitative analysis tools under certain conditions. Conclusion The evaluation processes need joint use of the methods to overcome defects. The idea of using Probahilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) in medical equipment support effectiveness evaluation processes is proposed. [Chinese Medical Equipment Journal, 2014,35 (2) 16-18]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30