IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i15p9212-d873094.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the Suitability of Smart Health Products for Aging Based on the IIVAHP-CRITIC Model: A Case Study of Smart Health Kiosk

Author

Listed:
  • Ning Lu

    (School of Art and Design, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China
    College of Design and Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117356, Singapore)

  • Yefei Li

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China)

  • Bochu Xu

    (School of Design, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 611756, China)

Abstract

In the global situation of an aging population, the evaluation of the suitability of smart health products for aging is very important in order to achieve sustainable development goals. However, few evaluation methods have been adopted for smart health products for older individuals. An objective and comprehensive evaluation system and evaluation methods need to be established to guide the design of smart health products. In this study, a Smart Health Kiosk (SHK) was used as an example, and an index system was established for the evaluation of the suitability for aging based on the influencing factors from four dimensions. To address the problem that it is difficult to quantify the subjective and objective weights in the evaluation, this study proposes a method of evaluating suitability for aging based on the combination of the Improved Interval-Valued Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Criteria Importance Though Intercrieria Correlation (IIVAHP-CRITIC) method. The results show that the method integrates the influence of subjective and objective weights on the evaluation and avoids the limitations of a single evaluation. It takes into account the relationship between the various levels of indicators and the subjective and objective indicators. Weights calculated by the IIVAHP-CRITIC method help to better assess the objectivity and validity of the design solutions. This evaluation method can effectively reflect the related attributes of each element in the aging-suitability design stage of smart health products. The evaluation results help to improve the quality and ergonomic comfort of aging products, and can effectively reduce the occurrence of design problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Ning Lu & Yefei Li & Bochu Xu, 2022. "Evaluation of the Suitability of Smart Health Products for Aging Based on the IIVAHP-CRITIC Model: A Case Study of Smart Health Kiosk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9212-:d:873094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9212/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9212/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marcelo de Maio Nascimento & Élvio Rúbio Gouveia & Adilson Marques & Bruna R. Gouveia & Priscila Marconcin & Andreas Ihle, 2022. "Gait Speed as a Biomarker of Cognitive Vulnerability: A Population-Based Study with Cognitively Normal Older Adults," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Ray Jones, 2009. "The Role of Health Kiosks in 2009: Literature and Informant Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-38, June.
    3. Oderanti, Festus Oluseyi & Li, Feng & Cubric, Marija & Shi, Xiaohui, 2021. "Business models for sustainable commercialisation of digital healthcare (eHealth) innovations for an increasingly ageing population," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Alireza Alinezhad & Javad Khalili, 2019. "New Methods and Applications in Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM)," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-030-15009-9, March.
    5. Sathyanarayanan Doraiswamy & Anupama Jithesh & Ravinder Mamtani & Amit Abraham & Sohaila Cheema, 2021. "Telehealth Use in Geriatrics Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic—A Scoping Review and Evidence Synthesis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-17, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hu Sun & Qihang Yang & Yueqin Wu, 2023. "Evaluation and Design of Reusable Takeaway Containers Based on the AHP–FCE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohammed Ifkirne & Houssam El Bouhi & Siham Acharki & Quoc Bao Pham & Abdelouahed Farah & Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh, 2022. "Multi-Criteria GIS-Based Analysis for Mapping Suitable Sites for Onshore Wind Farms in Southeast France," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, October.
    2. Martina Kuncova & Jana Seknickova, 2022. "Two-stage weighted PROMETHEE II with results’ visualization," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 30(2), pages 547-571, June.
    3. Susan Ostertag & Jade Bosic-Reiniger & Chris Migliaccio & Rachael Zins, 2022. "Promoting Older Adult Health with Interprofessional Education through Community Based Health Screening," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-10, May.
    4. Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Bencsik, Barbara & Palmié, Maximilian & Parida, Vinit & Wincent, Joakim & Gassmann, Oliver, 2023. "Business models for digital sustainability: Framework, microfoundations of value capture, and empirical evidence from 130 smart city services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Marco Locurcio & Francesco Tajani & Pierluigi Morano & Debora Anelli & Benedetto Manganelli, 2021. "Credit Risk Management of Property Investments through Multi-Criteria Indicators," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Clément Cormi & Jan Chrusciel & Antoine Fayol & Michel Van Rechem & Khuloud Abou-Amsha & Matthieu Tixier & Myriam Lewkowicz & David Laplanche & Stéphane Sanchez, 2021. "The Use of Telemedicine in Nursing Homes: A Mixed-Method Study to Identify Critical Factors When Connecting with a General Hospital," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    8. Ahmed, Umair & Carpitella, Silvia & Certa, Antonella, 2021. "An integrated methodological approach for optimising complex systems subjected to predictive maintenance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    9. Halil Kete & Fatih Karasaç, 2022. "Evaluation of the Economic Performances of the European Union Countries and Turkey in the Covid-19 Process with the COPRAS Method," Journal of Economic Policy Researches, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 373-395, July.
    10. Peter Zámborský & Zheng Joseph Yan & Erwann Sbaï & Matthew Larsen, 2021. "Cross-Border M&A Motives and Home Country Institutions: Role of Regulatory Quality and Dynamics in the Asia-Pacific Region," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-24, October.
    11. Weifeng Xu & Xiaomin Cui & Ruiwen Qi & Yuquan Lin, 2025. "A Novel Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach to Evaluate Sustainable Product Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-26, October.
    12. Zhu, Mengshu & Fang, Jiakun & Ai, Xiaomeng & Cui, Shichang & Feng, Yuang & Li, Peng & Zhang, Yihan & Zheng, Yongle & Chen, Zhe & Wen, Jinyu, 2023. "A comprehensive methodology for optimal planning of remote integrated energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    13. Teresa Riso & Carla Morrone, 2023. "To Align Technological Advancement and Ethical Conduct: An Analysis of the Relationship between Digital Technologies and Sustainable Decision-Making Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Mishra, Sandhya & Jain, Karuna, 2025. "Innovations in Healthcare: A systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    15. Ji-Min Sur & Young-Ju Kim, 2024. "Multi-Criteria Model for Identifying and Ranking Risky Types of Maritime Accidents Using Integrated Ordinal Priority Approach and Grey Relational Analysis Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Ziyu Qin & Jia Wang & Yunhan Wang & Lihao Liu & Junye Zhou & Xinyu Fu, 2025. "Assessing the Impacts of New Quality Productivity on Sustainable Agriculture: Structural Mechanisms and Optimization Strategies—Empirical Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-47, March.
    17. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis & Virgilijus Skulskis, 2021. "A Systematic Literature Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Sustainable Selection of Insulation Materials in Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Frishammar, Johan & Essén, Anna & Bergström, Frida & Ekman, Tilda, 2023. "Digital health platforms for the elderly? Key adoption and usage barriers and ways to address them," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Pearl A. Pinera & Pearl C. Kim & Fye A. Pinera & Jay J. Shen, 2025. "Social Determinants and Health Equity Activities: Are They Connected with the Adaptation of AI and Telehealth Services in the U.S. Hospitals?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(2), pages 1-13, February.
    20. Chen-Tung Chen & Chien-Chi Chu, 2024. "A Fuzzy Method for Exploring Key Factors of Smart Healthcare to Long-Term Care Based on Z-Numbers," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-27, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9212-:d:873094. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.