| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.018 | -0.018 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.371 | -0.371 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.571 | 0.571 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.106 | -0.106 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
1.050 | 1.050 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
2.510 | 2.510 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-0.837 | -0.837 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.268 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.684 | -0.684 |
The Université d'Antananarivo presents a scientific integrity profile with an overall score of -0.073, indicating a performance that is perfectly aligned with the national context of Madagascar. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in maintaining very low-risk levels for output in its own journals and for redundant publications, alongside controlled, low-risk activity in retractions, hyperprolific authorship, and multiple affiliations. However, areas requiring strategic attention emerge with medium-risk indicators in institutional self-citation, hyper-authored output, and a notable gap between its overall research impact and the impact of work where it holds intellectual leadership. These challenges are systemic, mirroring the national scientific landscape. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university is a clear national leader, ranking first in Madagascar in key thematic areas such as Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Earth and Planetary Sciences, Environmental Science, and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology. As the institution's mission statement was not available for this analysis, a direct alignment assessment is not possible. Nevertheless, the identified risks—particularly the dependency on external partners for impact and a tendency towards academic self-reference—could pose a challenge to any mission centered on achieving sovereign, globally recognized excellence and social responsibility. The university is encouraged to leverage its solid foundation in several integrity areas to proactively address these systemic vulnerabilities, thereby reinforcing its national leadership and strengthening its path toward sustainable, independent global impact.
The institution's Z-score of -0.018 is identical to the national average for Madagascar (-0.018), reflecting a risk level that is statistically normal for its context. This alignment indicates that the university's practices regarding researcher affiliations are consistent with national standards. The low value suggests that multiple affiliations are managed appropriately and do not signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping.” The institution’s profile is one of prudence and standard operational procedure within its environment.
With a Z-score of -0.371, matching the country's average exactly, the university demonstrates a level of retracted output that is normal for its scientific ecosystem. This synchrony suggests that the institution's quality control mechanisms prior to publication are functioning effectively and in line with national peers. The low score indicates that there are no systemic vulnerabilities in the institutional integrity culture, and the rate of corrections or withdrawals remains within an expected and healthy range, reflecting responsible scientific supervision rather than recurring malpractice.
The university's Z-score of 0.571 is identical to the national average (0.571), indicating that its medium-risk level for self-citation is not an isolated issue but rather reflects a systemic pattern shared across the country. This trend warns of a potential for scientific isolation or 'echo chambers' on a national scale, where institutions may validate their own work without sufficient external scrutiny. For the university, this shared practice poses a risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that its academic influence, like that of its national peers, may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than by broader recognition from the global scientific community.
The institution's Z-score of -0.106 is perfectly aligned with the national average (-0.106), demonstrating a statistically normal and low-risk profile in this area. This consistency with the national standard indicates that the university exercises appropriate due diligence in selecting dissemination channels for its research. The low rate of publication in journals that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards protects the institution from severe reputational risks and shows a healthy awareness of the dangers posed by 'predatory' or low-quality publishing practices.
With a Z-score of 1.050, the university mirrors the national average (1.050), pointing to a systemic pattern of medium risk in hyper-authorship throughout the country's research system. This shared tendency, particularly if it appears outside of 'Big Science' contexts where large author lists are common, may indicate a widespread culture of author list inflation that dilutes individual accountability. The university is thus part of a national trend that warrants a closer look to distinguish between necessary massive collaboration and potentially problematic 'honorary' or political authorship practices.
The institution's Z-score of 2.510 is identical to the country's average (2.510), revealing that its significant gap between overall impact and the impact of its own-led research is a systemic, national-level challenge. This pattern suggests that the country's scientific prestige, including that of the university, is highly dependent on external partners and may not be structurally sustainable. This shared vulnerability invites a critical reflection on whether high-level excellence metrics result from genuine internal capacity or from strategic positioning in collaborations where national institutions do not exercise primary intellectual leadership.
The university's Z-score of -0.837 matches the national average (-0.837), indicating a statistically normal and low-risk environment regarding hyperprolific authors. This alignment with the national context suggests a healthy balance between quantity and quality in research output. The low incidence of authors with extreme publication volumes indicates that there are no significant signals of problematic practices such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation, thereby upholding the integrity of the scientific record.
With a Z-score of -0.268, identical to the national average (-0.268), the university demonstrates a state of integrity synchrony, reflecting a total alignment with a national environment of maximum scientific security in this domain. This very low rate of publication in its own journals is a strong positive signal. It shows a clear commitment to avoiding conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring that its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review. This practice enhances the global visibility and credibility of its research, steering clear of using internal channels as 'fast tracks' for publication.
The institution's Z-score of -0.684 is perfectly aligned with the country's score (-0.684), signifying integrity synchrony and a complete absence of risk signals in this area. This alignment with a secure national environment indicates a strong institutional and systemic commitment to publishing substantive new knowledge. The very low score confirms that the practice of dividing studies into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity, known as 'salami slicing,' is not a concern, thereby protecting the integrity of the scientific evidence base and the efficiency of the peer-review system.
