Islamic Azad University, Shiraz Branch

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Islamic Azad University, Shiraz Branch, presents a generally positive integrity profile, reflected in an overall score of 0.133. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in maintaining responsible authorship practices and avoiding academic endogamy, with exceptionally low risk signals in hyper-authorship, hyperprolific authors, and publication in institutional journals. Furthermore, the university shows remarkable resilience by maintaining strong intellectual leadership over its research, a notable achievement given the national context. However, this solid foundation is contrasted by critical vulnerabilities, including a significant rate of retracted publications and medium-risk levels in publishing in discontinued journals and redundant output, which require immediate attention. These findings are particularly relevant given the institution's strong national standing in key thematic areas such as Energy, Earth and Planetary Sciences, and Mathematics, as identified by SCImago Institutions Rankings data. While a specific mission statement was not available for this analysis, the identified risks, especially concerning retractions and questionable publication venues, directly challenge the universal academic mission of pursuing excellence and upholding social responsibility through the generation of reliable knowledge. To secure its reputation and build on its considerable strengths, the institution is advised to implement targeted quality assurance and training initiatives focused on pre-publication review, responsible dissemination, and research ethics.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of -0.752 is slightly more favorable than the national average of -0.615. This indicates a prudent and well-managed approach to academic collaborations. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the institution's controlled rate suggests that its processes are more rigorous than the national standard, effectively managing the potential for strategic "affiliation shopping" and ensuring that institutional credit is claimed appropriately.

Rate of Retracted Output

The institution's Z-score of 1.150 is at a significant risk level and notably higher than the country's medium-risk average of 0.777. This suggests an accentuation of a vulnerability already present in the national system. Retractions are complex events, but a rate significantly higher than the global average alerts to a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture, indicating that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically. Beyond individual cases, this points to a potential for recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that requires immediate qualitative verification by management to protect its scientific reputation.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

With a Z-score of -0.540, the institution demonstrates a healthier profile than the national average of -0.262. This reflects a prudent management of citation practices, suggesting that the institution's work is validated by the broader scientific community rather than through internal 'echo chambers'. While a certain level of self-citation is natural to show research continuity, the institution's lower rate indicates a robust engagement with external scholarship and mitigates the risk of endogamous impact inflation, reinforcing the global recognition of its academic influence.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 0.559 is within the medium-risk category but reveals a higher exposure compared to the national average of 0.094. This disparity indicates that the institution is more prone than its national peers to channeling its research into questionable venues. A high proportion of output in discontinued journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This suggests an urgent need to enhance information literacy among researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices that expose the institution to severe reputational risks.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution exhibits an exceptionally low-risk Z-score of -1.263, which is well below the country's already low-risk average of -0.952. This demonstrates a consistent and commendable adherence to responsible authorship standards that aligns with the national environment. The absence of risk signals in this area indicates that the institution effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and 'honorary' or political authorship practices, thereby upholding individual accountability and transparency in its scientific contributions.

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

The institution's Z-score of -0.036 is in the low-risk category, showcasing remarkable institutional resilience when contrasted with the country's medium-risk average of 0.445. A very wide positive gap often signals a sustainability risk where scientific prestige is dependent on external partners. However, the institution's balanced score indicates that its prestige is structural and stems from real internal capacity. This demonstrates that control mechanisms are effectively mitigating the systemic national risk, allowing the institution to exercise strong intellectual leadership in its collaborations.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of -1.413, the institution shows a near-total absence of hyperprolific authorship, a profile significantly stronger than the national low-risk average of -0.247. This low-profile consistency reflects a healthy balance between productivity and quality. Extreme individual publication volumes often challenge the limits of human capacity for meaningful intellectual contribution. The institution's data suggests a culture that prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record over sheer metrics, effectively avoiding risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is in the very low-risk range, demonstrating a clear preventive isolation from the medium-risk dynamics observed at the national level (Z-score: 1.432). Excessive dependence on in-house journals can raise conflicts of interest, as the institution acts as both judge and party. The institution's minimal use of such channels shows it does not replicate the risk dynamics in its environment, indicating a strong commitment to independent, external peer review. This practice enhances the global visibility and competitive validation of its research.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of 0.237 places it at a medium-risk level, a moderate deviation from the country's low-risk average of -0.390. This suggests the institution shows greater sensitivity to risk factors than its peers. A high value in this indicator alerts to the practice of dividing a coherent study into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity, also known as 'salami slicing.' This practice distorts available scientific evidence and overburdens the review system, indicating a need to review institutional incentives to ensure they prioritize significant new knowledge over publication volume.