Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41331061›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Innovation of entrepreneurship education in auxiliary instruction system for college aesthetic course teaching under BPNN model.

Juan Xia

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.

Juan XiaConservatory of music, Hubei Normal University, Huangshi, 435000, China. xiaxia0211@hbnu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Music colleges in China currently face significant challenges in innovation and entrepreneurship education (IEE), including inadequate instructional support systems and fragmented teaching methods. These issues are particularly pronounced in aesthetic education courses, where scientific assessment and personalized guidance for students' entrepreneurial competence remain underdeveloped. To address this gap, this study proposes and validates an auxiliary instructional system based on the back propagation neural network (BPNN) model aimed at improving the precision and effectiveness of IEE within aesthetic education. The study investigates whether the BPNN model can accurately model and assess students' entrepreneurial abilities to support pedagogical optimization. Targeting graduates from music colleges in the Xi'an region, this study constructs a competence evaluation framework comprising four primary indicators and twelve secondary indicators, gathering 444 valid questionnaire responses. Using this data, the BPNN model is designed and trained to predict and provide feedback on students' innovation and entrepreneurship competencies. The model achieves a maximum relative error of only 1.64% between predicted and actual outputs, demonstrating strong accuracy and practical viability. Results highlight the theoretical and applied value of leveraging deep learning for entrepreneurial competence assessment in the integration of arts education and IEE. However, the current evaluation framework requires further refinement to better meet the evolving demands of specialization and industrialization.

Indexed as

EntrepreneurshipEstheticsNeural Networks, ComputerChinaCurriculumHumansMaleMusicStudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesTeachingUniversitiesAuxiliary instruction systemBack propagation neural network (BPNN)College aesthetic courseInnovation and entrepreneurship education (IEE)Music students

Identifiers

PMID41331061
PMCPMC12795843

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.