Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41131079›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

An approach for enhancing physical education analytics for college sports using AHP based MCDM algorithm integrated with MEREC method.

Huimin Gong

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Huimin GongCollege of Physical Education, Changsha University of Science & Technology, Changsha, 410114, China. bbdd10@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In today's data-driven era, the ability to make a well-informed and smart decision has never been more essential than ever. In this respect, physical education analytics has become a crucial tool for coaches, managers, and instructors that assists in assessing player growth and managing resources, and performances with great efficiency by tracking physical fitness, injury prevention, and the overall effectiveness of a program. Traditional approaches frequently overlook the significant aspects of physical education essential for long-term sports success, such as motor skills, teamwork dynamics, and mental toughness. So, there is a need to integrate the data into a decision-making framework that enhances the performance of athletes while optimizing the resources. By considering it, this paper introduces a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework that enhances physical education analytics by integrating the decision-making model, i.e., analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and (method on the removal effect of criteria) MEREC within the spherical fuzzy (SF) context. The proposed approach provides a robust and efficient framework that evaluates the pairwise comparison of each factor and analyzes the relative importance, which assists decision-makers in making more well-informed and comprehensive decisions. Moreover, the spherical fuzzy set (SFS) offers flexibility in describing human opinions by utilizing satisfaction, abstinence, and dissatisfaction levels. So, by leveraging this framework, colleges can make more efficient and reliable decisions that boost athletic performances and promote sustainable development.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAthletic PerformanceDecision MakingPhysical Education and TrainingSportsAthletesFuzzy LogicHumansUniversitiesAnalytical hierarchy procedureMEREC approachMulti-criteria decision-makingPhysical education analyticsSpherical fuzzy set

Identifiers

PMID41131079
PMCPMC12549882

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.