Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40413217›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation system and decision support system for learning management of higher education online courses.

Jiaohuan Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jiaohuan YangTeaching Support Service Center, The Open University of Jilin, Changchun, 130022, Jilin, China. jiaohuan_yang@outlook.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A Learning Management System (LMS) facilitates the implementation and effectiveness of online learning by providing sufficient tools for the organization, delivery, and administration of online courses. Traditional learning platforms lack diverse learning styles and limit the ability to provide personalized attention and support. However, the factors affecting the online learning experience are fuzziness and uncertainty. The research articles propose a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Evaluation System (FAHES) that integrates an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and a Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation System (FCES) to analyze the efficiency of online courses over existing challenges. A key component of FAHES is its decision-support facilities that incorporate fuzzy Logic, which allows educational institutions to make well-informed decisions when providing recommendations. AHP aims to create a structured hierarchy out of complex criteria and sub-criteria, allowing for pairwise comparisons and combining expert opinions, resulting in weights that reflect these priorities. Then, the FCES aggregates weighted inputs from multiple criteria and analyzes fuzzy data to evaluate the performance management of online courses. Thus, the model provides a clear and actionable evaluation by methodically assessing complex online learning systems while including and managing subjectivity and ambiguity. This approach provides a clear understanding of different factors influencing learning outcomes, interaction efficiency, personalized recommendations, and learner satisfaction through a multi-level evaluation framework. Hence, online course design and delivery improvement is achieved by providing practical insights and suggestions derived from the evaluation findings.

Indexed as

Analytic hierarchy processDecision support systemFuzzy comprehensive evaluation systemHigher educationLearning management system

Identifiers

PMID40413217
PMCPMC12103543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.