| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-1.175 | 0.648 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.653 | -0.189 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.864 | -0.200 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.545 | -0.450 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.787 | 0.859 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-1.706 | 0.512 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.654 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.246 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-1.186 | 0.387 |
The Ecole Nationale Veterinaire Agroalimentaire et de l'Alimentation de Nantes-Atlantique demonstrates an exemplary profile of scientific integrity, with an overall risk score of -0.818 that places it in the highest tier of institutional responsibility. The analysis reveals a remarkable absence of risk signals across all nine indicators, with eight categorized as 'very low' and one as 'low'. Key strengths include an exceptionally low gap between its overall impact and the impact of research under its leadership, alongside a negligible rate of hyperprolific authorship, signaling a culture of genuine scientific ownership and a focus on quality over quantity. This robust integrity profile provides a solid foundation for its thematic strengths, particularly in Agricultural and Biological Sciences, where it ranks 18th in France according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. The institution's mission to "Explorer, Former, Innover" is powerfully reinforced by these findings; a commitment to innovation and exploration is only credible when built upon a bedrock of ethical and transparent research practices. The near-total absence of integrity risks ensures that the institution's contributions are not only novel but also trustworthy and sustainable, fully aligning its operational reality with its strategic aspirations. Oniris stands as a benchmark for how to embed scientific integrity into the core of an academic mission, and it is recommended that it leverages this exceptional standing to lead national conversations on best practices in research governance.
The institution exhibits a Z-score of -1.175, in stark contrast to the national average of 0.648. This result demonstrates a clear preventive isolation from the risk dynamics observed elsewhere in the country. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, the national trend suggests a potential for strategic "affiliation shopping" to inflate institutional credit. The institution’s very low score indicates that it does not replicate these behaviors, maintaining a focused and transparent approach to collaboration that reinforces the integrity of its academic footprint and avoids any ambiguity in crediting research contributions.
With a Z-score of -0.653, significantly lower than the national average of -0.189, the institution demonstrates low-profile consistency and robust quality control. The absence of risk signals in this area aligns with the secure national standard but also surpasses it, suggesting that pre-publication review and methodological rigor are exceptionally effective. This minimal rate of post-publication correction underscores a strong institutional integrity culture, where potential errors are addressed proactively, safeguarding the scientific record and reinforcing the reliability of its research findings.
The institution's Z-score of -0.864 is substantially lower than the national average of -0.200, indicating a high degree of external validation and integration within the global scientific community. This low-profile consistency, which outperforms the already low-risk national context, confirms that the institution avoids the pitfalls of scientific isolation or 'echo chambers'. Its academic influence is clearly built on broad recognition from external peers rather than being inflated by internal dynamics, reflecting a healthy and outward-looking research ecosystem.
The institution’s Z-score of -0.545, compared to the country's -0.450, signifies a state of total operational silence regarding this risk. This performance, which is even stronger than the very low-risk national benchmark, points to exceptional due diligence in the selection of dissemination channels. It confirms that the institution's researchers are well-informed and effectively avoid predatory or low-quality journals, thereby protecting institutional reputation and ensuring that scientific output is channeled through credible and enduring media.
Displaying a Z-score of -0.787 against a national average of 0.859, the institution demonstrates notable institutional resilience. It successfully mitigates the systemic risks of authorship inflation that are more prevalent at the national level. This suggests that the institution has effective control mechanisms or cultural norms that promote transparency and accountability in authorship, ensuring that credit is assigned based on significant intellectual contribution and distinguishing its practices from the broader trend of potential 'honorary' authorships.
The institution's exceptional Z-score of -1.706, which starkly contrasts with the national average of 0.512, signals a profound preventive isolation from dependency risks. A wide positive gap can suggest that prestige is reliant on external partners rather than internal capacity. The institution's negative score indicates the opposite: its scientific impact is structurally sound and driven by research where it exercises direct intellectual leadership. This is a powerful indicator of scientific autonomy and sustainable excellence, showing that its reputation is built on its own robust capabilities.
With a Z-score of -1.413, far below the national average of -0.654, the institution shows an exemplary commitment to research quality over sheer volume. This low-profile consistency, which significantly exceeds the national standard, indicates a healthy research environment where the pressures for extreme productivity do not compromise the integrity of authorship. The near absence of hyperprolific authors suggests that the institution fosters a culture that values meaningful intellectual contribution, effectively avoiding risks such as coercive authorship or the dilution of scientific rigor.
The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is nearly identical to the national average of -0.246, demonstrating perfect integrity synchrony with its environment. This alignment within a very low-risk context confirms that the institution does not rely on internal journals to bypass external scrutiny. By publishing in independent, externally reviewed venues, it avoids potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring its research is validated by the global scientific community and maximizing its international visibility and impact.
The institution's Z-score of -1.186 stands in sharp opposition to the national average of 0.387, showcasing a clear preventive isolation from questionable publication practices. While the national context shows a medium risk of data fragmentation, the institution’s very low score indicates a strong preference for publishing complete, coherent studies. This commitment to presenting significant new knowledge over artificially inflating publication counts upholds the integrity of the scientific record and demonstrates a responsible approach that respects the time and resources of the peer-review system.
