Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

The Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados presents a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.250 that indicates performance superior to the global average. The institution demonstrates exceptional strengths in preventing academic endogamy and questionable productivity practices, with very low risk signals in the Rate of Hyperprolific Authors, Rate of Output in Institutional Journals, and Rate of Redundant Output. These areas of excellence are counterbalanced by medium-risk indicators in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations and, most notably, the Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals, which requires strategic attention. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's scientific leadership is most prominent in Veterinary (ranked 47th in Brazil), Agricultural and Biological Sciences (49th), and Medicine (51st). This strong integrity performance fundamentally supports its mission to generate knowledge with "excellence" and promote "social justice." However, the identified risk of publishing in low-quality journals could undermine this commitment to excellence and the generation of reliable knowledge for sustainable development. By addressing these specific vulnerabilities, the university can leverage its solid ethical foundation to further enhance its research quality and fully align its operational practices with its distinguished mission.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.159 is situated within a national context where the average is 0.236. This indicates that while the university reflects a systemic, medium-risk trend present across the country, it manages this phenomenon with greater moderation than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, a medium-level signal suggests a need for vigilance to ensure these practices consistently represent genuine collaboration rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit. The institution's ability to maintain a lower rate than the national average points to a differentiated management approach that tempers a common risk factor in its environment.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.155, significantly lower than the national average of -0.094, the institution demonstrates a prudent and rigorous approach to research quality. This low rate of retractions suggests that its quality control mechanisms prior to publication are effective. Rather than signaling systemic failures, this result points to a culture of responsible supervision and methodological rigor, reinforcing the integrity of its scientific output and aligning with best practices in research ethics.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution exhibits notable resilience against national trends, with a low-risk Z-score of -0.115 compared to the country's medium-risk average of 0.385. This strong performance indicates that the university's control mechanisms effectively mitigate the systemic risk of academic endogamy prevalent in its environment. A low rate of institutional self-citation is a healthy sign that the institution avoids scientific isolation or 'echo chambers,' ensuring its work is validated by the broader external community. This demonstrates that its academic influence is driven by global recognition rather than being inflated by internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 0.320 represents a moderate deviation from the national standard, which sits at a low-risk -0.231. This discrepancy highlights a specific vulnerability, showing a greater sensitivity to this risk factor than its peers. A medium-level score constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It indicates that a portion of its scientific production may be channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to reputational risks and suggesting an urgent need to enhance information literacy among its researchers to avoid predatory practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution maintains a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.755, which is considerably lower than the national average of -0.212. This demonstrates that its processes for managing authorship are more rigorous than the national standard. The low incidence of hyper-authored publications suggests that, outside of legitimate "Big Science" contexts, the institution effectively avoids the risks of author list inflation, thereby promoting individual accountability and transparency in its research contributions.

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

With a Z-score of -0.490, the institution shows significant institutional resilience, contrasting sharply with the national medium-risk average of 0.199. This negative gap indicates that the impact of research led by the institution is strong and not overly dependent on external partners. This performance suggests that its scientific prestige is built on structural, internal capacity and intellectual leadership, mitigating the sustainability risk associated with relying on exogenous collaborations for impact. This is a clear indicator of a mature and self-sufficient research ecosystem.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.413 is in the very low-risk category, aligning perfectly with the low-risk national standard of -0.739. This absence of risk signals demonstrates a healthy research environment characterized by a strong balance between quantity and quality. The extremely low rate of hyperprolific authors suggests that the university's culture discourages practices that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record, such as coercive or honorary authorship, ensuring that contributions are meaningful and substantive.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The university demonstrates a clear case of preventive isolation from national risk dynamics, with a very low Z-score of -0.268 in an environment where the country's average is a medium-risk 0.839. This result shows the institution does not replicate the risk of academic endogamy observed elsewhere. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own journals, the university commits to independent external peer review, which minimizes conflicts of interest, enhances the global visibility of its research, and ensures its scientific production is validated through standard competitive channels.

Rate of Redundant Output

With a very low-risk Z-score of -0.933, the institution's performance aligns with the low-risk national standard (-0.203) while showing even greater control. This absence of signals related to redundant publications indicates a culture that values significant, new knowledge over artificially inflated productivity. It suggests that researchers are focused on producing coherent, impactful studies rather than engaging in 'salami slicing'—the practice of fragmenting data into minimal publishable units—thereby upholding the integrity of the scientific evidence base.