Recently, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making methods (MCDMs) have become increasingly relevant in public transport planning, offering structured ways to assess complex alternatives that involve both technical and human-centered criteria. Despite their widespread use, previous studies have often overlooked the involvement of citizens in the decision-making process. Moreover, the wide variety of available MCDMs can pose challenges in selecting the most appropriate method for a given context. To address these gaps, this study introduces an integrated framework that combines five MCDM techniques: AHP, SAW, TOPSIS, VIKOR, and PROMETHEE II. The approach incorporates both expert assessments and user preferences to provide a comprehensive assessment of transit alternatives. Applied to two case studies, Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam) and Brescia (Italy), the framework highlighted how citizen input can meaningfully contribute to public transport planning while also enabling the comparison of methodological outcomes across diverse urban contexts. The proposed framework provides a flexible, transparent, and replicable tool for policymakers and transport planners aiming to evaluate and prioritize public transport solutions in both developing and developed countries.