Проблемы социальной гигиены, здравоохранения и истории медициныПроблемы социальной гигиены, здравоохранения и истории медицины0869-866X2412-2106Joint-Stock Company Chicot232510.32687/0869-866X-2025-33-s2-1005-1010Научная статьяМатематические инструменты приоритизации технологий здравоохранения: фокус на внедрение моделей мультикритериального анализа принятия решенийАндреевД. А.ГБУ города Москвы «Научно-исследовательский институт организации здравоохранения и медицинского менеджмента Департамента здравоохранения города Москвы», 115088, Москва, Россия24102025331005101027102025Copyright © 1970, АО "Шико"1970MCDA (методы многокритериального анализа решений) позволяют проводить комплексную оценку технологий здравоохранения по разнородным критериям. В исследовании проанализированы основные методы MCDA и особенности их применения для приоритизации медицинских технологий. Материалы получены из базы PubMed и системы Google. Представлен обобщённый алгоритм MCDA, выделены часто используемые модели: метод взвешенной суммы, теория многокритериальной полезности, аналитический иерархический процесс (AHP). Рассмотрены программные инструменты поддержки MCDA. Особое внимание уделено перспективным гибридным методам (AHP-TOPSIS) и моделям для работы с неопределённостями (нечёткие AHP и TOPSIS). Эффективное внедрение MCDA требует развития медицинской информатики, однако ключевая роль принадлежит человеческому фактору — экспертам, определяющим стратегию анализа, качество исходных данных и интерпретацию результатов. Автоматизированные системы и искусственный интеллект нуждаются в обязательном контроле и валидации со стороны специалистов при использовании для управленческих решений в здравоохранении.multi-criteria decision analysisMCDAhealth technology assessmentprioritizationimplementationdigital technologiesmanagementмультикритериальный анализ принятия решенийвнедрениеоценка технологий здравоохраненияприоритизацияцифровые технологииорганизация здравоохранения1.Khanal S., Nghiem S., Miller M. et al. Development of a prioritization framework to aid healthcare funding decision making in health technology assessment in Australia: application of multicriteria decision analysis // Value in Health. 2024. Vol. 27. P. 1585—1593. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.0032.Baltussen R., Marsh K., Thokala P. et al. Multicriteria decision analysis to support health technology assessment agencies: benefits, limitations, and the way forward // Value in Health. 2019. Vol. 22. P. 1283—1288. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.0143.Baran-Kooiker A., Czech M., Kooiker C. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) models in health technology assessment of orphan drugs — a systematic literature review. Next steps in methodology development? // Front. Public Health. 2018. Vol. 6. P. 287. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.002874.Marsh K. D., Sculpher M., Caro J. J., Tervonen T. The use of MCDA in HTA: great potential, but more effort needed // Value in Health. 2018. Vol. 21. P. 394—397. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.0015.Niewada M., Zawodnik A. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for health care decision making — overview of guidelines // J. Health Policy & Outcomes Res. 2019. Vol. 1. DOI: 10.7365/JHPOR.2018.2.46.Angelis A., Linch M., Montibeller G. et al. Multiple criteria decision analysis for HTA across four EU member states: piloting the advance value framework // Social Science & Medicine. 2020. Vol. 246. P. 112595. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.1125957.Campolina A. G., Estevez-Diz M. D.P., Abe J. M., de Soárez P. C. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for evaluating cancer treatments in hospital-based health technology assessment: the paraconsistent value framework // PLOS One. 2022. Vol. 17. P. e0268584. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.02685848.Roy A., Kar B. A multicriteria decision analysis framework to measure equitable healthcare access during COVID-19 // J. Transport & Health. 2022. Vol. 24. P. 101331. DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2022.1013319.Gongora-Salazar P., Rocks S., Fahr P. et al. The use of multicriteria decision analysis to support decision making in healthcare: an updated systematic literature review // Value in Health. 2023. Vol. 26. P. 780—790. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.11.00710.Takhar P., Geirnaert M., Gavura S. et al. Application of Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to prioritize real-world evidence studies for health technology management: outcomes and lessons learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) collaboration // Curr. Oncol. 2024. Vol. 31. P. 1876—1898. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol3104014111.Gauvreau C. L., Schreyer L., Gibson P. J. et al. Development of a value assessment framework for pediatric health technologies using multicriteria decision analysis: expanding the value lens for funding decision making // Value in Health. 2024. Vol. 27. P. 879—888. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.01212.Ruggeri M., Cadeddu C., Roazzi P. et al. Multi—criteria—decision—analysis (MCDA) for the horizon scanning of health innovations an application to COVID 19 emergency // Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020. Vol. 17. P. 7823. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph1721782313.Zelei T., Mendola N. D., Elezbawy B. et al. Criteria and scoring functions used in Multi-criteria decision analysis and value frameworks for the assessment of rare disease therapies: a systematic literature review // PharmacoEconomics — Open. 2021. Vol. 5. P. 605—612. DOI: 10.1007/s41669-021-00271-w14.Sun C., Li S., Deng Y. Determining weights in multi-criteria decision making based on negation of probability distribution under uncertain environment // Mathematics. 2020. Vol. 8. P. 191. DOI: 10.3390/math802019115.Hansen P., Devlin N. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in healthcare decision-making // Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance. Oxford; 2019. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.9816.Belton V., Stewart T. Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.17.Saaty T. L. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process // Management Science. 1986. Vol. 32. P. 841—855. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.32.7.84118.Bana E., Costa C. A., Vansnick J.-C. The MACBETH approach: basic ideas, software, and an application // Meskens N., Roubens M. (eds.) Advances in Decision Analysis. Mathematical Modelling: Theory and Applications. Springer, Dordrecht; 1999. Vol. 4. P. 131—157. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-0647-6_919.Reed Johnson F., Lancsar E., Marshall D. et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force // Value in Health. 2013. Vol. 16. P. 3—13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.222320.Bellos I. Multicriteria decision-making methods for optimal treatment selection in network meta-analysis // Medical Decision Making. 2023. Vol. 43. P. 78—90. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X22112667821.Thokala P., Duenas A. Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment // Value in Health. 2012. Vol. 15. P. 1172—1181. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.01522.Chaube S., Pant S., Kumar A. et al. An overview of multi-criteria decision analysis and the applications of AHP and TOPSIS methods // Int. J. Math. Eng. Manag. Sci. 2024. Vol. 9. P. 581—615. DOI: 10.33889/IJMEMS.2024.9.3.03023.Global Six Sigma USA. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). All You Need to Know 2024. URL: https://www.6sigma.us/six-sigma-in-focus/multi-criteria-decision-analysis-mcda/ (дата обращения: 28.04.2025).24.Khan I., Pintelon L., Martin H. The application of multicriteria decision analysis methods in health care: a literature review // Medical Decision Making. 2022. Vol. 42. P. 262—274. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X21101904025.Beny K., Dubromel A., du Sartz de Vigneulles B. et al. Multiple criteria decision analysis for therapeutic innovations in a hemophilia care center: a pilot study of the organizational impact of innovation in hemophilia care management // PLOS One. 2022. Vol. 17. P. e0273775. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.027377526.Schneider P. P., van Hout B., Heisen M. et al. The Online elicitation of personal utility functions (OPUF) tool: a new method for valuing health states // Wellcome Open Research. 2022. Vol. 7. P. 14. DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17518.127.Angelis A., Kanavos P. Value-based assessment of new medical technologies: towards a robust methodological framework for the application of multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment // PharmacoEconomics. 2016. Vol. 34. P. 435—446. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-015-0370-z28.Yang C., Wang Y., Hu X. et al. Improving hospital based medical procurement decisions with health technology assessment and multi-criteria decision analysis // INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing. 2021. Vol. 58. DOI: 10.1177/0046958021102291129.Hezer S., Gelmez E., Özceylan E. Comparative analysis of TOPSIS, VIKOR and COPRAS methods for the COVID-19 regional safety assessment // J. Infect. Public Health. 2021. Vol. 14. P. 775—786. DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2021.03.00330.Su P., Zhi K., Xu H. et al. The application of multi-criteria decision analysis in evaluating the value of drug-oriented intervention: a literature review // Front. Pharmacol. 2024. Vol. 15. P. 1245825. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.124582531.Moreno-Calderón A., Tong T. S., Thokala P. Multi-criteria decision analysis software in healthcare priority setting: a systematic review // PharmacoEconomics. 2020. Vol. 38. P. 269—283. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-019-00863-932.Babashahi S. Using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support health research funding decision-making. Otago; 2020.33.Hummel J. M., Bridges J. F. P., IJzerman M. J. Group decision making with the analytic hierarchy process in benefit-risk assessment: a tutorial // The Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. 2014. Vol. 7. P. 129—140. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0050-734.Mobinizadeh M., Raeissi P., Nasiripour A. A. et al. A model for priority setting of health technology assessment: the experience of AHP-TOPSIS combination approach // Daru. 2016. Vol. 24. P. 10. DOI: 10.1186/s40199-016-0148-735.Hongxia W., Juanjuan G., Han W. et al. An integration of hybrid MCDA framework to the statistical analysis of computer-based health monitoring applications // Front. Public Health. 2024. Vol. 11. P. 1341871. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1341871