SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 15 Issue: 3

Multiple Criteria Sorting Model with MEREC and VIKOR-Sort for Evaluating European Union Countries Through Health Indicators

Esra Duygu Durmaz(İZMİR BAKIRÇAY ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK VE MİMARLIK FAKÜLTESİ, ENDÜSTRİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0002-8882-333X
İlker Gölcük(İZMİR BAKIRÇAY ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK VE MİMARLIK FAKÜLTESİ, ENDÜSTRİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0002-8430-7952
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In the first stage, the MEREC approach is employed to determine objective indicator weights by evaluating how the overall assessment changes when each indicator is removed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Evaluating national healthcare performance is a complex and multidimensional problem that requires balancing system resources against health outcomes and financial equity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study introduces an integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) framework combining the MEREC (Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria) and VIKOR-Sort methods to classify the 27 European Union (EU) member states into ordered health-performance categories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the first stage, the MEREC approach is employed to determine objective indicator weights by evaluating how the overall assessment changes when each indicator is removed.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Health Performance Indicators · MEREC · Multiple Criteria Sorting

Abstract

Evaluating national healthcare performance is a complex and multidimensional problem that requires balancing system resources against health outcomes and financial equity. This study introduces an integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) framework combining the MEREC (Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria) and VIKOR-Sort methods to classify the 27 European Union (EU) member states into ordered health-performance categories. The analysis uses a set of health indicators that reflect key dimensions of risk and system performance, including preventable mortality burdens, health-system capacity, financing effort and outcome vulnerability. The proposed methodology is based on a data-driven model designed to reduce decision-maker subjectivity. In the first stage, the MEREC approach is employed to determine objective indicator weights by evaluating how the overall assessment changes when each indicator is removed. In the second stage, using the weights, the VIKOR-Sort method is utilized to classify countries into ordered performance classes based on boundary profiles. The results identify three performance groups: higher-performing countries, a broad middle group with mixed results, and a lower-performing group facing multiple challenges. The ordered class structure is intended to provide a basis for benchmarking and policy interpretation and to help identify priority areas for improvement across countries’ health systems.

🔖

Cite This Article

Durmaz, E. D., Gölcük, İ. (2026). Multiple Criteria Sorting Model with MEREC and VIKOR-Sort for Evaluating European Union Countries Through Health Indicators. Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Volume: 15 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.17798/bitlisfen.1864482

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. K. Kalavani, A. Haqbin, P. Shojaei, and Z. Zare, “Investigating the development and access to healthcare services across Iranian provinces,” Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 53–62, 2022.
  2. M. Kutlu, Y. Kahreman, and A. K. Celik, “Social Progress-Economic Performance Nexus: Causality Analysis for D8 and G8,” Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, vol. 59, no. 3, 2025.
  3. T. Bulut, “Classifying the WHO European countries by noncommunicable diseases and risk factors,” Health Policy, vol. 153, p. 105247, 2025.
  4. N. Narayan, K. K. Singh, and U. Srivastava, “Developmental performance ranking of SAARC nations: an application of TOPSIS method of multi-criteria decision making,” International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 26–50, 2020.
  5. R. Lacko, Z. Hajduová, T. Bakalár, and H. Pavolová, “Efficiency and productivity differences in healthcare systems: the case of the European Union,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 178, 2022.
  6. D. Majcherek, S. W. Hegerty, A. M. Kowalski, M. S. Lewandowska, and D. Dikova, “Opportunities for healthcare digitalization in Europe: Comparative analysis of inequalities in access to medical services,” Health Policy, vol. 139, p. 104950, 2024.
  7. P. Y. Balçık, Ş. Demirci, and M. Konca, “Comparison of European countries’ health indicators and health expenditures by clustering analysis,” Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 365–377, 2021.
  8. F. Yılmaz and Ö. İnce, “A Comparative Analysis of the WHO European Region Countries’ Health 2020 Performance Using MCDM Methods,” Journal of Health Management, p. 09720634251396341, 2025.
  9. P. Y. Balçık, Ş. Demirci, and M. Konca, “Determinants of health system performance in Europe: A study based on clustering analysis,” Acıbadem Univ. Sağlık Bilim. Derg., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 682–689, 2021.
  10. E. D. Durmaz and İ. Gölcük, “Avrupa Ülkelerinde Toplum Sağlığına İlişkin Göstergelerin Çok Kriterli Sinıflandırma ile Değerlendirilmesi,” in 44. Yöneylem Araştırması ve Endüstri Mühendisliği Ulusal Kongresi, Ankara, Türkiye, 2025, p. 36.
  11. S. Mete, M. Yucesan, M. Gul, and E. Ozceylan, “An integrated hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate countries’ COVID-19 risks,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 90, p. 101744, 2023.
  12. L. Demir, M. E. Akpınar, C. Araz, and M. A. Ilgın, “A green supplier evaluation system based on a new multi-criteria sorting method: VIKORSORT,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 114, pp. 479–487, Dec. 30, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2018.07.071.
  13. M. Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M. Amiri, E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, and J. Antucheviciene, “Determination of objective weights using a new method based on the removal effects of criteria (MEREC),” Symmetry, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 525, 2021.
  14. A. V. Ricardo, A. S. Costa, and J. R. Figueira, “Enhancing hospital benchmarking: A multidimensional approach to quality assessment in Portugal,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 93, p. 101899, 2024.
  15. A. A. Nasser, A. S. A. Alghawli, S. Saleh, and A. A. Elsayed, “Health security disparities in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: A comparative analysis using an integrated MCDM and clustering approach,” Journal of Biosafety and Biosecurity, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 38–51, 2025.
  16. D. U. Ozsahin, N. A. Isa, B. Uzun, and I. Ozsahin, “Quantifying holistic capacity response and healthcare resilience in tackling COVID-19: Assessment of country capacity by MCDM,” PLoS ONE, vol. 19, no. 4, p. e0294625, 2024.
  17. I. Özgür and M. D. P. Güre, “Evaluation of rare diseases policy performance of OECD countries using MCDM methods,” Health Policy and Technology, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 100537, 2021.
  18. M. Tutak and J. Brodny, “Evaluating differences in the Level of Working Conditions between the European Union Member States using TOPSIS method,” Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1–29, 2022.
  19. A. S. Amiri, A. Babaei, and M. Khedmati, “Country-level assessment of COVID-19 performance: A cluster-based MACONT-CRITIC analysis,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 171, p. 112762, 2025.
  20. Z. Wen, H. Liao, and E. K. Zavadskas, “MACONT: Mixed aggregation by comprehensive normalization technique for multi-criteria analysis,” Informatica, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 857–880, 2020.
  21. M. Pinho, A. S. Costa, M. Meneses, and J. Manso, “A multiple criteria sorting method for supporting the maintenance management of medical ventilators: The case of Hospital da Luz Lisboa,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 86, p. 101458, 2023.
  22. J. Almeida-Dias, J. R. Figueira, and B. Roy, “A multiple criteria sorting method where each category is characterized by several reference actions: The Electre Tri-nC method,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 217, no. 3, pp. 567–579, 2012.
  23. L. Ocampo and K. Yamagishi, “Multiple criteria sorting of tourist sites for perceived COVID-19 exposure: the use of VIKORSORT,” Kybernetes, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 3121–3152, 2022.
  24. J. Khan, A. Ishizaka, and S. K. Mangla, “Assessing risk of supply chain disruption due to COVID-19 with fuzzy VIKORSort,” Annals of Operations Research, pp. 1–26, Sep. 9, 2022.
  25. S. Opricovic and G.-H. Tzeng, “Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 156, no. 2, pp. 445–455, 2004.
  26. Our World in Data, “Global Health Data Explorer.” United Kingdom: Global Change Data Lab. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/search?topics=Global+Health. Accessed: Jan. 2026.
  27. IHME, “Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network. Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021).” Seattle, United States: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). Available: https://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-results/. Accessed: Jan. 2026.
  28. World Bank, “World Development Indicators. Global Health Workforce Statistics, World Health Organization (WHO); Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); Country data.” Available: https://data.worldbank.org. Accessed: Jan. 2026.
  29. WHO, “World Health Organization. Global Health Observatory data repository.” Geneva: World Health Organization. Available: https://www.who.int/data/gho. Accessed: Jan. 2026.
  30. S. Opricovic, “Fuzzy VIKOR with an application to water resources planning,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 12983–12990, 2011.