Islamic Azad University, Hamedan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.432 indicating a performance significantly better than the global average. This strong foundation is built upon exceptional control in multiple key areas, including the prevention of hyper-authorship, hyper-prolificacy, redundant publications, and academic endogamy. The institution effectively insulates itself from national risk trends, particularly in publication retractions and reliance on external leadership for impact. This commitment to sound scientific practice directly supports its mission to advance knowledge and foster innovation, a goal further evidenced by its national standing in thematic areas such as Environmental Science and Mathematics, according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. However, a notable vulnerability exists in the rate of publication in discontinued journals, which presents a direct challenge to the mission's emphasis on "high-quality education" and "scientific innovation." Addressing this specific channel for dissemination is crucial to ensure that the university's research output consistently reflects its high standards of excellence and social responsibility. By reinforcing due diligence in publication venue selection, the university can fully align its operational practices with its strategic vision, solidifying its position as a leader in responsible research.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of -0.626 is statistically aligned with the national average of -0.615, indicating a risk level that is normal and expected for its context. This suggests that the university's collaborative patterns and researcher mobility are in sync with national practices. While disproportionately high rates can sometimes signal attempts to inflate institutional credit, the current level at Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, reflects a standard and legitimate engagement in partnerships, such as those between universities and teaching hospitals, without raising any integrity concerns.

Rate of Retracted Output

The university demonstrates significant institutional resilience, with a low-risk Z-score of -0.277 in contrast to the medium-risk national average of 0.777. This positive divergence suggests that the institution's internal quality control mechanisms are effectively mitigating systemic risks prevalent in the country. A high rate of retractions can alert to recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor. The university's low score indicates that its pre-publication supervision and integrity culture are robust, successfully preventing the systemic failures observed elsewhere and upholding a higher standard of research reliability.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

With a Z-score of -0.761, the institution exhibits a more prudent profile than the national standard (-0.262), indicating rigorous management of its citation practices. This low rate demonstrates a healthy integration with the global scientific community, actively avoiding the 'echo chambers' that can arise from excessive self-referencing. By ensuring its work is validated through external scrutiny rather than internal dynamics, the university effectively mitigates the risk of endogamous impact inflation and confirms that its academic influence is based on broad recognition, not just institutional continuity.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution shows high exposure in this area, with a Z-score of 0.572 that is notably more pronounced than the national average of 0.094. This constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. A high proportion of publications in such journals indicates that a significant portion of 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 enhance information literacy among researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality venues.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution maintains a very low-risk profile (Z-score: -1.228) that is even more controlled than the low-risk national standard (-0.952). This absence of risk signals demonstrates a consistent commitment to responsible authorship practices. The data confirms that the university is not showing signs of author list inflation, a practice that can dilute individual accountability and transparency. This result indicates that authorship is likely awarded based on meaningful contributions, distinguishing the institution's collaborative work from potentially 'honorary' or political authorship practices.

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

The university achieves a state of preventive isolation with an exceptionally low Z-score of -1.481, starkly contrasting with the medium-risk national average of 0.445. This indicates that the institution does not replicate the national dynamic of depending on external partners for impact. A wide positive gap often signals that scientific prestige is exogenous and not structural. The university's score, however, suggests that its excellence metrics result from genuine internal capacity and that it exercises intellectual leadership in its research, ensuring its scientific prestige is sustainable and self-generated.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a very low Z-score of -1.413, the institution shows no signs of risk related to hyperprolific authors, a profile that is significantly more conservative than the national average (-0.247). This low-profile consistency suggests a healthy balance between productivity and quality. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and point to risks like coercive authorship or authorship assigned without real participation. The university's data indicates that its culture prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record over the inflation of quantitative metrics.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution effectively isolates itself from national risk patterns, registering a very low Z-score of -0.268 compared to the country's medium-risk score of 1.432. This demonstrates a clear commitment to external validation and global visibility. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own journals, the university sidesteps potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy, where production might bypass independent peer review. This practice ensures that its research is validated through standard competitive channels, strengthening its international standing rather than using internal 'fast tracks' to inflate publication counts.

Rate of Redundant Output

The university's Z-score of -1.186 signifies a near-total absence of redundant publications, a stronger performance than the already low-risk national average of -0.390. This low-profile consistency indicates that the institution's research culture discourages data fragmentation or 'salami slicing.' Such practices, aimed at artificially inflating productivity, distort the scientific evidence and overburden the review system. The university's excellent result suggests a focus on publishing coherent, significant new knowledge rather than prioritizing volume through minimal publishable units.