Análise comparativa entre métodos MCDA na seleção de doadores de células tronco hematopoéticas.

Abstract

This work presents a comparative analysis between two multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods, AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) and DEX (Decision Expert), applied to the selection of hematopoietic stem cell donors. The study investigates the methodological differences, the model development time, and the ease of interpreting the results. Both methods are based on the hierarchical decomposition of criteria. AHP is a quantitative method that uses a relative importance matrix of criteria and a relative comparison matrix of options. On the other hand, DEX is a qualitative method that employs models with descriptive value variables and utility functions expressed by decision rules. A comparison is made by observing two hypothetical examples of evaluating hematopoietic stem cell donors. The main objectives of the work were: to assess the efficiency and accuracy of both methods, analyze the complexity of the modeling process, and identify the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The results showed that, although AHP allows for more detailed adjustments through comparison matrices, DEX offers greater clarity in the results through qualitative decision rules. The model development time was shorter with AHP, although the description of the options was more didactic with DEX.