ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine learning prediction of customer satisfaction in fitness centres.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Customer satisfaction in fitness centres is critical for fostering loyalty, higher spending, cross-buying, and positive recommendations. This study seeks to develop a predictive model of gym users' satisfaction, identify its main determinants, and optimise predictive accuracy through machine learning techniques. Data from 10,368 users across five Spanish fitness centre chains were analysed. Five machine learning algorithms were applied: decision tree, random forest, logistic regression, gradient boosting, and Naïve Bayes. Model performance was evaluated using AUC, sensitivity, specificity, F-measure, Cohen's Kappa, and overall accuracy. The random forest model showed the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.954, sensitivity = 0.933, specificity = 0.825, F-measure = 0.91, Cohen's Kappa = 0.767, overall accuracy = 0.889). The most influential factors for satisfaction were the overall environment of the centre, employee trustworthiness, staff quality, and management of waiting times. This study extends prior research by applying machine learning algorithms to explain customer satisfaction in fitness centres, positioning satisfaction as the primary predictive outcome and providing interpretable insights into how environmental and service-related factors shape satisfaction beyond traditional retention-focused approaches.
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.