Table 2 Explanation of the quantitative and qualitative criteria used in the MCDA model for this case study
From: Decision support for risk prioritisation of environmental health hazards in a UK city
Quantitative criteria | ||
Mortality based on mortality models of relative risk from a change in exposure to the hazard following intervention. Morbidity based on hospital admission models of relative risk from a change in exposure to the hazard following intervention. | ||
Qualitative criteria | ||
Criteria | Application | Explanation |
‘Robust Evidence’ | Is there robust evidence for the risk? | What is the level of evidence on the risk, i.e. it is robust, plentiful, consistent, accepted by the scientific community |
‘Wellbeing’ | Impact on wellbeing | With the intervention in place, what impact does this have on wellbeing and happiness in particular |
‘Sustainability of intervention’ | Is the intervention sustainable? | Is the intervention sustainable in terms of economic, social, and environmental impacts? Does it require a lot of resources to keep in place and maintain? Are there social and environmental costs for its implementation and running? |
‘Level of regulation’ | How regulated is the intervention | Is the intervention subject to regulation? Is it enforceable in law? Are there penalties for failure? E.g. emissions tests. |