Universite Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

With an overall integrity score of 0.521, Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar (UCAD) presents a profile of significant academic leadership combined with specific, critical vulnerabilities in its research practices. The institution demonstrates notable strengths in maintaining a very low-risk profile for hyperprolific authorship and publication in institutional journals, indicating a healthy balance in productivity and a commitment to external validation. However, this is contrasted by a significant alert regarding the rate of retracted output, which exceeds an already high national average and represents the most urgent area for intervention. Other areas of concern include a higher-than-average exposure to risks associated with multiple affiliations, hyper-authorship, and a dependency on external collaborations for impact. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, UCAD's academic excellence is undisputed, holding a leadership position as the top-ranked institution in Senegal across crucial fields such as Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Environmental Science, Medicine, and Biochemistry. This academic prestige directly supports its mission to train high-level personnel and serve national development. However, the identified integrity risks, particularly the high rate of retractions, directly challenge the mission's call for scientifically qualified professionals and dedicated service, as they can undermine the credibility and reliability of its research. To fully align its operational integrity with its academic excellence and mission, UCAD is advised to implement a robust, institution-wide review of its pre-publication quality control and authorship policies, thereby safeguarding its legacy and its vital role in the development of Senegal and Africa.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.950 is notably higher than the national average of 0.635, indicating that the university is more prone to this risk factor than its national peers. This suggests a higher exposure to practices that, while often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, can also signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through "affiliation shopping." Given this heightened tendency, a review of affiliation policies is advisable to ensure that all declared affiliations are substantive and reflect genuine collaboration, thereby maintaining transparency and accurate credit attribution.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 1.573, the institution not only shows a significant risk but also leads this metric in a country already facing a critical challenge (national Z-score of 1.175). This situation constitutes a global red flag, demanding immediate qualitative verification by management. A rate this far above the average suggests that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically. Beyond isolated incidents, this pattern alerts to a deep vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture, indicating possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that could severely damage its scientific reputation and credibility.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution exhibits a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.486, which is more favorable than the national average of -0.295. This indicates that the university manages its citation practices with more rigor than the national standard, successfully avoiding the "echo chambers" that can arise from excessive self-citation. This low rate reflects a healthy integration with the global scientific community and suggests that the institution's academic influence is validated by external scrutiny rather than being inflated by internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The university's Z-score of 0.389 is lower than the national average of 0.542, demonstrating a more effective management of this particular risk. This suggests the institution is more discerning in its selection of publication venues compared to its national peers. By moderating a risk that appears common in the country, the university better protects itself from the severe reputational damage associated with channeling research through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards, thereby avoiding the waste of resources on predatory or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of 0.157, the institution shows a greater tendency toward hyper-authored publications than the national environment, where the average is 0.004. This higher exposure suggests that publications with extensive author lists are more common at the university. This pattern serves as a signal to distinguish between necessary massive collaboration in "Big Science" fields and potential author list inflation. It is important to verify that these cases do not reflect "honorary" or political authorship practices, which dilute individual accountability and transparency.

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

The institution's Z-score of 0.448 is significantly higher than the national average of 0.113, indicating a much greater dependency on external partners for its citation impact. This high exposure to what can be termed "exogenous prestige" signals a potential sustainability risk. The wide gap suggests that the institution's scientific prestige may not be fully rooted in its own structural capacity or intellectual leadership. This invites a strategic reflection on whether its high-impact metrics are the result of genuine internal capabilities or a successful but dependent positioning in collaborations led by others.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.275 is in almost perfect alignment with the national average of -1.305, reflecting an environment of maximum scientific security in this regard. This total absence of risk signals indicates a healthy balance between quantity and quality in individual research output. It confirms that the university is free from the dynamics of extreme publication volumes that can point to coercive authorship, "salami slicing," or other practices that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, identical to the national average, the institution demonstrates complete integrity synchrony with its environment. This perfect alignment shows a clear commitment to external, independent peer review and a healthy avoidance of academic endogamy. By not relying excessively on its own journals, the university avoids potential conflicts of interest and ensures its scientific production undergoes standard competitive validation, which in turn enhances its global visibility and credibility.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of 0.491 is notably lower than the national average of 0.597, indicating a differentiated and more effective management of this risk. This suggests the university fosters a culture that better moderates the practice of "salami slicing," where studies are fragmented into minimal units to artificially inflate productivity. By showing more control than its national peers, the institution demonstrates a stronger commitment to publishing significant new knowledge rather than distorting the scientific evidence, thereby protecting the integrity of its research output.