ArticleScientific reports2025
Hybrid FAHP-FTOPSIS methodology for objective football player selection and ranking.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Practical and objective player evaluation is a critical challenge in modern sports analytics, particularly in football, where selection decisions must balance multiple performance dimensions under uncertainty. This study introduces a hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methodology combining the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and the Fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS) to evaluate and rank football players. The methodology integrates 12 criteria across three key domains: anthropometric attributes, fitness levels, and technical skills. FAHP is employed to derive the relative weights of criteria based on expert pairwise comparisons, while FTOPSIS calculates a closeness coefficient (CC) for each player to determine their ranking. Applied to a case study involving 20 youth football players aged 13-16, the results show that Player 10 achieved the highest closeness coefficient (CC = 0.92), followed by Player 4 (CC = 0.89) and Player 16 (CC = 0.85), indicating superior overall performance. Sensitivity analysis, including variations of ± 10% in criteria weights and performance scores, demonstrated the robustness of the top-ranked players' positions, with minimal fluctuation in CC values (e.g., Player 10's CC varied between 0.92 and 0.94). The proposed method provides a transparent and data-driven framework that accommodates variability in expert judgment and uncertainty in performance data. Despite strengths in robustness and comprehensiveness, limitations include dependence on expert input and scalability for larger datasets. Future work should explore the integration of position-specific evaluation models and their application to other sports domains. The findings highlight FAHP-FTOPSIS as a viable and rigorous approach for objective, multidimensional player selection in football.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.