层次分析法在2型糖尿病用药决策中的应用
该数据集通过层次分析法评估2型糖尿病附加用药方案的优先级，包含专家偏好权重和比较结果，为药物决策提供量化依据。
基本信息
资源简介
层次分析法在2型糖尿病用药决策中的应用
【一句话概览】
本数据集是 figshare 公开的结构化表格数据集，收录 2 个文件、合计 443.40 KB，主题涵盖 type 2 diabetes.MethodsWe、diabetes medications、decision contexts、treatment alternatives、Expert Choice software，可用于统计建模、特征工程与队列分析，CC BY 4.0 许可开放获取。
【数据集背景】
本数据集源站标题为《Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Medication Decision-Making in Type 2 Diabetes》。配套论文《Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Medication Decision-Making in Type 2 Diabetes》发表于 PLOS ONE（2015），DOI：10.1371/journal.pone.0126625。源站首次发布：2015-05-22。
【数据内容】
源站原始描述：Aim To investigate the feasibility and utility of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for medication decision-making in type 2 diabetes. Methods We conducted an AHP with nine diabetes experts using structured interviews to rank add-on therapies (to metformin) for type 2 diabetes. During the AHP, participants compared treatment alternatives relative to eight outcomes (hemoglobin A1c-lowering and seven potential harms) and the relative importance of the different outcomes. The AHP model and instr…
【数据结构与技术规格】
文件数 2 个，合计 443.40 KB。S1_File.doc：application/msword，158.21 KB。S2_File.docx：application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document，285.19 KB。数据集 DOI：10.1371/journal.pone.0126625。
【主题与分类】
源站学科分类：Biological Sciences。主题标签：type 2 diabetes.MethodsWe、diabetes medications、decision contexts、treatment alternatives、Expert Choice software、AHP model、future studies、type 2 diabetes、group session、group.ConclusionsThe AHP。
【适用方向】
结构化表格数据可直接用于统计建模、特征工程与队列分析。
【获取与许可】
源站页面：https://plos.figshare.com/articles/dataset/_Use_of_the_Analytic_Hierarchy_Process_for_Medication_Decision_Making_in_Type_2_Diabetes_/1424048
使用许可：CC BY 4.0（https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/）。
规范引用：M. Maruthur, Nisa; M. Joy, Susan; G. Dolan, James; M. Shihab, Hasan; Singh, Sonal (2016). Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Medication Decision-Making in Type 2 Diabetes. PLOS ONE. Dataset
【使用注意】
· 源站最后修改于 2023-05-30，引用时请注意版本时效。
下载信息
注册下载
需要注册 Kaggle 账号并登录后下载，适合需要跟踪下载记录和使用 API 的用户。
暂未开放公开下载
无需注册即可直接获取公开样本或文档，适合快速预览和评估数据集质量。
免登录有偿下载
公开数据集受托下载与技术交付服务。
提供高速下载与技术交付服务（收技术服务费，非数据销售）
暂未开放当前数据集主要来源为 Kaggle 公开托管，完整影像包建议通过原始链接或 Kaggle API 获取。
使用方式
数据集获取（Figshare）
- 源站标题：Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Medication Decision-Making in Type 2 Diabetes
- DOI：10.1371/journal.pone.0126625
- 发布日期：2015-05-22
- 文件数：2 个
- 文件总体积：443.40 KB
- 源站页面：https://plos.figshare.com/articles/dataset/_Use_of_the_Analytic_Hierarchy_Process_for_Medication_Decision_Making_in_Type_2_Diabetes_/1424048
命令行下载
curl -L -o "S1_File.doc" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/2079989"
curl -L -o "S2_File.docx" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/2079990"
文件清单
S1_File.doc（158.21 KB）S2_File.docx（285.19 KB）
文件总体积 443.40 KB（源站 API 实测）。
数据说明
Aim
To investigate the feasibility and utility of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for medication decision-making in type 2 diabetes.
Methods
We conducted an AHP with nine diabetes experts using structured interviews to rank add-on therapies (to metformin) for type 2 diabetes. During the AHP, participants compared treatment alternatives relative to eight outcomes (hemoglobin A1c-lowering and seven potential harms) and the relative importance of the different outcomes. The AHP model and instrument were pre-tested and pilot-tested prior to use. Results were discussed and an evaluation of the AHP was conducted during a group session. We conducted the quantitative analysis using Expert Choice software with the ideal mode to determine the priority of treatment alternatives.
Results
Participants judged exenatide to be the best add-on therapy followed by sitagliptin, sulfonylureas, and then pioglitazone. Maximizing benefit was judged 21% more important than minimizing harm. Minimizing severe hypoglycemia was judged to be the most important harm to avoid. Exenatide was the best overall alternative if the importance of minimizing harms was prioritized completely over maximizing benefits. Participants reported that the AHP improved transparency, consistency, and an understanding of others’ perspectives and agreed that the results reflected the views of the group.
Conclusions
The AHP is feasible and useful to make decisions about diabetes medications. Future studies which incorporate stakeholder preferences should evaluate other decision contexts, objectives, and treatments.
许可
CC BY 4.0
引用
学术使用请引用 DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0126625（source: https://plos.figshare.com/articles/dataset/_Use_of_the_Analytic_Hierarchy_Process_for_Medication_Decision_Making_in_Type_2_Diabetes_/1424048）。
数据缺失？
依托陕西、四川两大基地，我们与超过十家三甲医院建立直接合作关系，覆盖合规授权、采集治理、专业标注、数据交付的全流程，为AI医疗团队提供即拿即用的高质量临床数据。
⚡️ 需要数据支持或标注服务？立即联系我们获取专业方案。
