ArticleScientific reports2026
Selecting AI-enabled music learning technologies in higher education using AHP and TOPSIS.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital and AI-supported music learning tools are increasingly adopted in higher education, yet their selection is often driven by informal preferences rather than transparent, evidence-based procedures. This study implements a multi-criteria decision-making framework to rank AI-enabled music-learning technology options using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Six technology categories were evaluated across 25 sub-criteria grouped into five dimensions, based on judgments from a 20-member expert panel and questionnaire responses from 100 higher-education music learners. The weighting results indicate that pedagogical value and learner experience received the greatest emphasis, followed by technical fit, implementation feasibility, and governance and ethics. The resulting shortlist ranked notation/score-based learning platforms highest overall, followed by LMS-integrated assessment and feedback tools and ear-training/musicianship applications, while the lowest-ranked category consistently underperformed on governance and technical-fit requirements. Sensitivity and scenario analyses indicated that the top tier remained stable, although the top choice can shift under governance-led or resource-constrained priorities. The framework supports defensible procurement and curriculum design by integrating expert and learner evidence, validated weighting, and robust ranking outputs.
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.