Islamic Azad University, Qom

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Islamic Azad University, Qom, demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, characterized by a low overall risk score of -0.597. The institution exhibits exceptional strengths in maintaining quality control and intellectual autonomy, with significantly lower-than-average national rates for retracted publications, output in institutional journals, and a minimal gap between its overall impact and the impact of its researcher-led output. These results indicate a strong foundation of internal governance and a commitment to external validation. However, a notable vulnerability exists in the rate of publication in discontinued journals, which presents a direct challenge to the university's mission of fostering knowledge development and upholding "human, ethical and Islamic virtues." This specific risk, if unaddressed, could undermine the institution's otherwise excellent performance and its commitment to providing students with skills grounded in integrity. To fully realize its strategic vision, the university is advised to leverage its clear strengths in research governance while implementing targeted policies to improve due diligence in the selection of publication venues.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution shows a Z-score of -0.963, positioning it in a very low-risk category and well below the national average of -0.615. This demonstrates low-profile consistency, where the complete absence of risk signals aligns with, and even improves upon, the national standard. This suggests that the university's policies effectively regulate institutional credit and prevent practices like “affiliation shopping,” ensuring that affiliations are legitimate and reflect genuine collaboration rather than strategic inflation.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.606, the institution demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of retracted publications, particularly when contrasted with the medium-risk national average of 0.777. This signals a state of preventive isolation, where the university’s internal processes effectively shield it from the systemic quality control issues observed elsewhere in the country. A rate significantly lower than the national average suggests that the institution's pre-publication quality control mechanisms are robust and successful, indicating a strong integrity culture that prevents the kind of recurring malpractice or lack of methodological rigor that may be a vulnerability in the broader environment.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university's Z-score for institutional self-citation is -0.745, indicating a more prudent profile than the national average of -0.262. Although both are in a low-risk range, the institution manages its processes with greater rigor, suggesting a healthier balance between referencing internal research lines and engaging with the global scientific community. This lower rate indicates a reduced risk of operating in a scientific 'echo chamber' and suggests that the institution's academic influence is validated by sufficient external scrutiny, avoiding the endogamous impact inflation that can arise from disproportionate self-citation.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution presents a Z-score of 0.412 in this indicator, which is notably higher than the national average of 0.094. This result suggests a high exposure to risk, indicating that the university is more prone than its national peers to channeling research into questionable publication venues. A high proportion of output in discontinued journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This Z-score indicates that a significant portion of scientific production is being channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational risks and suggesting an urgent need for information literacy to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.055, the institution maintains a more prudent profile in hyper-authored output compared to the national average of -0.952. This indicates that the university manages its authorship practices with more rigor than the national standard. The lower value suggests that the institution is effectively distinguishing between necessary massive collaboration and the risk of author list inflation, thereby upholding individual accountability and transparency in its research contributions and discouraging 'honorary' authorship.

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

The institution's Z-score of -2.696 is exceptionally low, marking a significant positive deviation from the national average of 0.445. This demonstrates a remarkable case of preventive isolation from a national trend where institutional impact is often dependent on external partners. A very low score in this indicator signals high sustainability and structural strength, as it suggests that the university's scientific prestige is generated by its own internal capacity and intellectual leadership, rather than being a reflection of strategic positioning in collaborations where it does not lead.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The university's Z-score of -1.413 is in the very low-risk category, significantly below the national average of -0.247. This finding shows low-profile consistency, where the institution's absence of risk signals surpasses the already low-risk national standard. This indicates a healthy balance between quantity and quality in research production, successfully avoiding the potential pitfalls of hyperprolificacy, such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation, and ensuring that productivity does not compromise the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution shows a very low reliance on its own journals, a stark contrast to the medium-risk national average of 1.432. This reflects a state of preventive isolation, where the university avoids the risks of academic endogamy and conflicts of interest that are more prevalent in the national system. By not depending on in-house journals, the institution demonstrates a strong commitment to independent, external peer review, ensuring its scientific production undergoes standard competitive validation and enhances its global visibility rather than risking the use of internal channels as 'fast tracks' for publication.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.165, while in the low-risk category, is higher than the national average of -0.390. This slight difference signals an incipient vulnerability that warrants review. While not yet a significant issue, this pattern suggests a minor tendency toward data fragmentation or 'salami slicing' compared to national peers. It serves as an early warning to monitor publication practices and ensure that the focus remains on publishing significant new knowledge rather than artificially inflating productivity by dividing studies into minimal publishable units.