International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science (IJITCS)
IJITCS Vol. 16, No. 5, 8 Oct. 2024
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 896KB)
Selection of Health Insurance Policy: Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Combined Compromised Solution Approach Under Spherical Fuzzy Environment
PDF (896KB), PP.69-80
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
Author(s)
Index Terms
Spherical Fuzzy Sets, AHP, CoCoSo, Insurance Policy, MCDM
Abstract
The process of health insurance policy selection is a critical decision with far–reaching financial implications. The complexity of health insurance policy selection necessitates a structured approach to facilitate informed decision-making amidst numerous criteria and provider options. This study addresses the health insurance policy selection problem by employing a comprehensive methodology integrating Spherical Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (SF–AHP) and Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) Algorithm. Eight experienced experts, four from academia and industry each, were engaged, and eleven critical factors were identified through literature review, survey, and expert opinions. SF–AHP was utilized to assign weights to these factors, with Claim settlement ratio (C9) deemed the most significant. Subsequently, CoCoSo Algorithm facilitated the ranking of insurance service providers, with alternative A6 emerging as the superior choice. The research undertakes sensitivity analysis, confirming the stability of the model across various scenarios. Notably, alternative A6 consistently demonstrates superior performance, reaffirming the reliability of the decision-making process. The study’s conclusion emphasizes the efficacy of the joint SF–AHP and CoCoSo approach in facilitating informed health insurance policy selection, considering multiple criteria and their interdependencies. Practical implications of the research extend to individuals, insurance companies, and policymakers. Individuals benefit from making more informed choices aligned with their healthcare needs and financial constraints. Insurance companies can tailor policies to customer preferences, enhancing competitiveness and customer satisfaction. Policymakers gain insights to inform regulatory decisions, promoting fair practices and consumer protection in the insurance market. This study underscores the significance of a structured approach in navigating the intricate health insurance landscape, offering practical insights for stakeholders and laying a foundation for future research advancements.
Cite This Paper
Mangesh P. Joshi, Priya M. Khandekar, "Selection of Health Insurance Policy: Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Combined Compromised Solution Approach Under Spherical Fuzzy Environment", International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science(IJITCS), Vol.16, No.5, pp.69-80, 2024. DOI:10.5815/ijitcs.2024.05.05
Reference
[1]M. E. Kruk, A. D. Gage, C. Arsenault, K. Jordan, H. H. Leslie, S. Roder–DeWan, and M. Pate, “High–quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution,” The Lancet Global Health, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 1196–1252, November 2018.
[2]M. Freed, N. Ochieng, N. Sroczynski, A. Damico, and K. Amin, “Medicare and Dental Cover- age: A Closer Look,” *KFF*, 2021. Available: https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/ medicare-and-dental-coverage-a-closer-look/.
[3]M. C. B. Stanton and K. Roelich, “Decision making under deep uncertainties: A review of the applicability of methods in practice,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 171, p. 120939, December 2021.
[4]J. D. Tracy, K. A. James, H. Kaplan, and S. Rassenti, “An investigation of health insurance policy and behavior in a virtual environment,” PLoS ONE, vol. 16, no. 4, p. e0248784, April 2021. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.pone.0248784.
[5]S. Pant, P. Garg, A. Kumar, M. Ram, A. Kumar, H. K. Sharma, and Y. Klochkov, “AHP–based multi–criteria decision–making approach for monitoring health management practices in smart healthcare system,” International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, pp. 1–12, 2023.
[6]S. Gupta, “AHP–based multi–criteria decision–making for forest sustainability of lower Himalayan foothills in northern circle India–a case study,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, vol. 194, no. 12, pp. 849–849, December 2022.
[7]P. T. Kieu, V. T. Nguyen, V. T. Nguyen, and T. P. Ho, “A spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (SF–AHP) and combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) algorithm in distribution center location selection: A case study in agricultural supply chain,” Axioms, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 53, February 2021.
[8]G. K. F. Kutlu Gu¨ndogĖdu and C. Kahraman, “A novel spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its renewable energy application,” Soft Computing, vol. 24, pp. 4607–4621, June 2020.
[9]M. Jawad, M. Naz, and H. Muqaddus, “A multi–criteria decision–making approach for portfolio selection by using an automatic spherical fuzzy AHP algorithm,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 85–98, January 2023. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2023.2174905.
[10]M. Joshi, “Motor Insurance Policy Selection: A Joint Spherical Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (SF-AHP) and Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) Approach,” Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 183–190, February 2024. Available: https://doi.org/10.56042/jsir.v83i2.4302.
[11]Y. Unal and G. Temur, “Sustainable supplier selection by using spherical fuzzy AHP,” Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 593–603, 2022.
[12]M. Yazdani, Z. Wen, H. Liao, A. Banaitis, and Z. Turskis, “A grey combined compromise solution (CoCoSo–G) method for supplier selection in construction management,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 858–874, August 2019.
[13]O. Dogan, “Process mining technology selection with spherical fuzzy AHP and sensitivity analysis,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 178, p. 114999, November 2021.
[14]C. T. Lorio, E. M. Opiso, V. J. T. Resabal, I. Bernardo–Arugay, J. R. Ortenero, A. B. Beltran, and M. A. B. Promen- tilla, “Optimal treatment technology selection for acid mine drainage via spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process,” Minerals Engineering, vol. 202, p. 108260, January 2023.
[15]T. L. Nguyen, P. H. Nguyen, H. A. Pham, T. G. Nguyen, D. T. Nguyen, T. H. Tran, and H. T. Phung, “A novel integrating data envelopment analysis and spherical fuzzy MCDM approach for sustainable supplier selection in steel industry,” Mathematics, vol. 10, no. 11, p. 1897, November 2022.
[16]C. N. Wang, C. C. Chou, T. T. Dang, H. P. Nguyen, and N. A. T. Nguyen, “Integrating triple bottom line in sustainable chemical supplier selection: a compromise decision–making–based spherical fuzzy approach,” Processes, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 889, May 2022.
[17]M. Yazdani, P. Zarate, E. Kazimieras Zavadskas, and Z. Turskis, “A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi–criteria decision–making problems,” Management Decision, vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 2501–2519, September 2019.
[18]F. Ecer and D. Pamucar, “Sustainable supplier selection: A novel integrated fuzzy best worst method (F–BWM) and fuzzy CoCoSo with Bonferroni (CoCoSo’B) multi–criteria model,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 266, p. 121981, July 2020.
[19]A. Ulutas¸, C. B. Karakus¸, and A. Topal, “Location selection for logistics center with fuzzy SWARA and CoCoSo methods,” Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 4693–4709, 2020.
[20]M. Deveci, D. Pamucar, U. Cali, E. Kantar, K. Ko¨lle, and J. O. Tande, “Hybrid q–rung orthopair fuzzy sets based CoCoSo model for floating offshore wind farm site selection in Norway,” CSEE Journal of Power and Energy Systems, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1261–1280, September 2022.
[21]A. Kazemikhasragh and M. V. Buoni Pineda, “Inclusive policies for health financing towards universal health cov- erage in Pakistan: direct or indirect taxes,” International Journal of Health Governance, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 10–16, 2023.
[22]D. M. Ludwinski and D. M. Anderson, “Dynamic Price Competition for Low–Cost Silver Plans on Healthcare.gov 2014–2021,” Medical Care Research and Review, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 540–547, September 2023. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/10775587231183567.
[23]B. C. Park and B. C. Drolet, “CareCredit: Profiting off Medical Debt,” Annals of Surgery, vol. 277, no. 2, pp. 252–253, February 2023.
[24]S. Sehhat, M. Taheri, and D. H. Sadeh, “Ranking of insurance companies in Iran using AHP and TOPSIS tech- niques,” American Journal of Research Communications, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 51–60, 2015.
[25]F. Azizi, M. Kenari, and M. Nasiri, “An AHP method for identifying influential factors on insurance cost,” Manage- ment Science Letters, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 2479–2482, September 2013.
[26]M. J. Browne, “Evidence of adverse selection in the individual health insurance market,” Journal of Risk and Insur- ance, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 13–33, March 1992. Available: https://doi.org/10.2307/253214.
[27]S. D. Pizer and J. C. Prentice, “Time is money: outpatient waiting times and health insurance choices of elderly veterans in the United States,” Journal of Health Economics, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 626–636, July 2011.
[28]M. Saeedpoor, A. Vafadarnikjoo, M. Mobin, and A. Rastegari, “A servqual model approach integrated with fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methodologies to rank life insurance firms,” *In Proceedings of the International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management*, 2015, pp. 1–1.
[29]P. B. Ashturkar, “An Examination into claim settlement ratios of public and private life insurance companies in India,” International Journal of Management and Social Sciences, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 322–331, August 2015.
[30]R. Feldman, M. Finch, B. Dowd, and S. Cassou, “The demand for employment–based health insurance plans,” Journal of Human Resources, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 115–142, January 1989. Available: https://doi.org/10. 2307/145935.