| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.112 | 0.291 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.137 | 0.351 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.223 | -0.028 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
3.683 | 1.327 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.858 | -0.757 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-1.208 | 1.393 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -1.413 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | 2.585 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.108 | -0.039 |
The Universidad Central Marta Abreu de Las Villas presents a robust scientific integrity profile, marked by exceptional control over most risk indicators but shadowed by a critical vulnerability in one specific area. With an overall score of 0.396, the institution demonstrates a strong foundation, particularly in preventing hyperprolific authorship, maintaining intellectual leadership in its collaborations, and avoiding academic endogamy through institutional journals. These strengths align with its prominent national standing in key thematic areas, as evidenced by its SCImago Institutions Rankings in Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Arts and Humanities, and Social Sciences. However, a significant rate of publication in discontinued journals presents a direct challenge to its stated mission of achieving a "tradition of excellence" and "quality." This practice undermines the perceived value of its research and introduces reputational risk. To fully realize its mission, the university should leverage its solid integrity framework to urgently address its publication channel selection policies, ensuring that its scientific output reflects the high standards it champions.
The institution's Z-score of -0.112 contrasts sharply with the national average of 0.291. This suggests a high degree of institutional resilience, as the university appears to have effective control mechanisms that mitigate the systemic risks of affiliation inflation observed elsewhere in the country. The university's controlled rate indicates that it is not exposed to practices like “affiliation shopping” aimed at artificially inflating institutional credit, thereby maintaining a clear and transparent representation of its collaborative footprint.
With a Z-score of -0.137, significantly lower than the national average of 0.351, the institution demonstrates effective pre-publication quality control. This performance suggests a resilient academic culture that successfully filters out potential issues before they escalate. A high rate of retractions can signal systemic failures in methodological rigor or integrity. In this case, the university's low rate indicates that its supervision and review processes are robust, protecting its reputation and reinforcing a culture of responsible science.
The institution's Z-score for this indicator is -0.223, while the national Z-score is -0.028. This prudent profile indicates that the university manages its citation practices with more rigor than the national standard. A certain level of self-citation is natural, reflecting ongoing research lines. However, the institution's lower-than-average rate demonstrates a healthy integration with the global scientific community, avoiding the 'echo chambers' that can arise from excessive self-validation and ensuring its impact is recognized externally.
The institution exhibits a critical Z-score of 3.683, a figure that not only surpasses but significantly amplifies the national vulnerability, which stands at a Z-score of 1.327. This result constitutes a major alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. A high proportion of publications in such journals indicates that a significant part of the university's scientific output is being channeled through media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards. This practice exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and suggests an urgent need to implement information literacy and stricter guidance for researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality venues that compromise its mission of excellence.
The university's Z-score of -0.858 is slightly more favorable than the national average of -0.757, reflecting a prudent approach to authorship. This indicates that the institution manages its collaborative processes with a rigor that exceeds the national standard. The university's profile suggests it effectively discourages practices like 'honorary' or political authorship, thereby promoting transparency and clear individual accountability in its research output.
With a Z-score of -1.208, the institution shows a very low risk, in stark contrast to the national average of 1.393. This result signals a commendable preventive isolation, where the university does not replicate the risk dynamics of external dependency observed in its environment. A wide positive gap can suggest that prestige is borrowed rather than built internally. The university's score, however, indicates that its scientific impact is driven by research where it exercises genuine intellectual leadership, demonstrating a sustainable and structural capacity for excellence.
The institution's Z-score of -1.413 is identical to the national average, indicating perfect synchrony with a national environment of maximum security in this area. This total alignment reflects a shared culture that discourages practices associated with hyperprolificacy. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. The complete absence of this signal at both institutional and national levels is a testament to a research ecosystem that prioritizes quality and integrity over sheer volume.
The university's Z-score of -0.268 is exceptionally low, especially when compared to the national average of 2.585. This demonstrates a clear preventive isolation from the national trend towards academic endogamy. While in-house journals can be useful, excessive reliance on them creates conflicts of interest. The institution's minimal use of such channels shows a strong commitment to independent, external peer review, ensuring its research is validated by the global scientific community and maximizing its international visibility.
The institution's Z-score of -0.108 is lower than the national average of -0.039, indicating a prudent profile in publication strategy. This suggests the university manages its research dissemination with more rigor than the national standard. A high rate of bibliographic overlap can point to 'salami slicing,' where studies are fragmented to inflate publication counts. The university's controlled rate indicates a focus on publishing significant, coherent bodies of work, thereby contributing meaningfully to the scientific record and respecting the integrity of the research process.
