University of Malakand

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

The University of Malakand presents a complex integrity profile, with an overall score of 0.677 reflecting a balance of commendable strengths and significant vulnerabilities. The institution demonstrates robust control in areas such as its minimal reliance on institutional journals, prudent management of hyper-authorship, and a strong correlation between its overall impact and the impact of its internally-led research. These strengths are foundational. However, they are counterbalanced by medium-to-significant risks, most notably a high rate of retracted output, which, despite being slightly below the national average, points to a systemic challenge. Further concerns arise from elevated rates of institutional self-citation, hyperprolific authorship, and multiple affiliations compared to national peers. Thematically, the university showcases strong national positioning in key scientific areas, including Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (ranked 4th in Pakistan), Medicine (5th), and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (7th), according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. These areas of excellence are directly threatened by the identified integrity risks. A high rate of retractions and questionable citation practices fundamentally contradict the mission "to produce efficient and responsible graduates through research-oriented teaching," as responsibility in research is non-negotiable. To safeguard its academic reputation and fully align its practices with its mission, the university is advised to undertake a targeted review of its pre-publication quality control mechanisms and authorship policies, thereby transforming current vulnerabilities into future pillars of scientific integrity.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The University of Malakand shows a Z-score of 0.440 in this indicator, a noticeable contrast to the national average of -0.021. This moderate deviation suggests the institution is more sensitive to risk factors associated with affiliation practices than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the university's higher rate warrants a review. It could signal strategic attempts by researchers to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping,” a practice that, if unmonitored, can dilute the institution's distinct academic identity and misrepresent its collaborative contributions.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 1.084, the institution operates within a context of significant national risk, where the country average is 1.173. This situation represents an attenuated alert; while the university is part of a critical national dynamic, its rate is slightly lower, suggesting a degree of internal control relative to its environment. Nevertheless, a high Z-score in this indicator is a serious concern, suggesting that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically. Beyond individual cases, a rate significantly higher than the global average alerts to a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture, indicating possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that requires immediate qualitative verification by management.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score for self-citation is 1.029, diverging moderately from the national average of -0.059. This difference indicates that the university displays a greater tendency toward this risk than is typical in the country. A certain level of self-citation is natural, reflecting the continuity of research lines. However, this disproportionately high rate can signal concerning scientific isolation or 'echo chambers' where work is validated without sufficient external scrutiny. This value warns of the risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than by recognition from the global scientific community.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The university's Z-score of 0.858 is closely aligned with the national average of 0.812, indicating that its performance reflects a systemic pattern shared across the country. This high proportion of publications in discontinued journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. A high Z-score indicates that a significant portion of scientific production is being channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards. This exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy among its researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution demonstrates a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.963, which is more favorable than the national average of -0.681. This suggests that the university manages its authorship processes with more rigor than the national standard. By maintaining a low rate of hyper-authored publications, the institution effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration in "Big Science" and potentially problematic practices like author list inflation. This control helps preserve individual accountability and transparency in research contributions.

Gap between Impact of total output and the impact of output with leadership

The University of Malakand exhibits institutional resilience in this area, with a low-risk Z-score of -0.182, in contrast to the medium-risk national average of 0.218. This indicates that the university's control mechanisms appear to successfully mitigate a systemic risk present in the country. A low gap suggests that the institution's scientific prestige is not overly dependent on external partners but is instead driven by its own structural capacity and intellectual leadership. This healthy balance signals a sustainable research model where excellence is generated internally, not just imported through collaborations.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of 1.896, the university shows high exposure to this risk, significantly exceeding the national average of 0.267. This suggests the institution is far more prone to hosting authors with extreme publication volumes than its peers. While high productivity can reflect leadership, such a high indicator value challenges the limits of human capacity for meaningful intellectual contribution. It alerts to potential imbalances between quantity and quality, pointing to risks such as coercive authorship, data fragmentation, or the assignment of authorship without real participation—dynamics that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 signals total operational silence in this risk category, performing even better than the very low-risk national average of -0.157. This is a clear area of strength, demonstrating an absence of risk signals related to academic endogamy. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own journals, the university ensures its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, thereby mitigating conflicts of interest and enhancing the global visibility and competitive validation of its research.

Rate of Redundant Output

The university maintains a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.416, which is lower and thus more positive than the national average of -0.339. This indicates that the institution manages its publication strategies with greater rigor than the national standard. A low rate of redundant output suggests a focus on publishing significant new knowledge rather than artificially inflating productivity by dividing studies into minimal publishable units. This practice strengthens the scientific record and shows respect for the academic review system.