Shandong Sport University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Shandong Sport University demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, marked by an almost complete absence of risk signals across the majority of indicators. This performance is particularly commendable in areas such as Institutional Self-Citation and Hyperprolific Authorship, where the university significantly outperforms national trends, indicating a strong culture of external validation and a focus on quality over quantity. The institution's key research strengths, as identified by SCImago Institutions Rankings data, lie in Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology; Medicine; and Psychology. However, this solid foundation is critically undermined by a single, severe anomaly: an extremely high rate of publication in discontinued journals. While the university's mission was not available for this analysis, this specific risk directly contravenes the universal academic principles of excellence and social responsibility, as it suggests resources may be channeled into low-quality or predatory outlets, damaging the institution's reputation and the credibility of its research. To secure its standing and build upon its evident strengths, it is imperative that the university addresses this vulnerability with immediate and decisive action, reinforcing its commitment to impactful and ethically sound research dissemination.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of -0.092, a value in close alignment with the national average of -0.062. This proximity suggests a state of statistical normality, where the university's collaborative patterns are consistent with those expected for its context and size. While multiple affiliations can sometimes signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit, in this case, the low and controlled rate indicates that these collaborations are likely the legitimate result of researcher mobility and partnerships, reflecting standard academic practice rather than a point of integrity risk.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.512, the institution displays a near-total absence of retracted publications, a figure that is well-aligned with China's low-risk national standard (Z-score: -0.050). This low-profile consistency is a positive indicator of institutional health. A high rate of retractions can suggest systemic failures in pre-publication quality control. Conversely, this institution's excellent result points towards robust internal review processes and a strong integrity culture, effectively preventing methodological errors or potential malpractice from entering the scientific record.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university demonstrates exceptional performance in this area, with a Z-score of -1.081, in stark contrast to the national medium-risk average of 0.045. This represents a case of preventive isolation, where the institution successfully avoids the risk dynamics prevalent in its environment. A high rate of self-citation can signal scientific isolation or 'echo chambers' that inflate impact through endogamous validation. Shandong Sport University's very low score, however, indicates that its research is validated by the broader international community, reflecting genuine external impact and a healthy integration into global scientific discourse.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

A critical alert is raised by the institution's Z-score of 5.433, which represents a severe discrepancy when compared to the low-risk national average of -0.024. This atypical and significant risk activity requires an immediate and deep integrity assessment. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This Z-score indicates that a significant portion of the university's 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 and policy reinforcement to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution's Z-score of -1.136 is firmly in the very low-risk category, consistent with the low-risk national context (Z-score: -0.721). This alignment demonstrates that the university's authorship practices are transparent and well-governed. Outside of 'Big Science' contexts, high rates of hyper-authorship can indicate author list inflation, which dilutes individual accountability. The absence of this signal suggests that the institution fosters a culture where authorship is assigned based on meaningful contribution, avoiding honorary or political practices.

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

With a Z-score of -1.467, the institution shows total operational silence in this risk indicator, performing even better than the country's already strong average of -0.809. This result is highly positive, as a wide positive gap can signal that an institution's prestige is dependent on external partners rather than its own capabilities. This very low score indicates that the impact of the university's research is driven by its own intellectual leadership, demonstrating robust internal capacity, scientific autonomy, and a sustainable model for generating high-quality, impactful science.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The university shows a Z-score of -1.413, marking a clear instance of preventive isolation from the medium-risk trend observed at the national level (Z-score: 0.425). This is a significant strength. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may point to risks such as coercive authorship or a focus on quantity over quality. The institution's very low score indicates a healthy research environment that prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record and substantive contributions over the inflation of productivity metrics.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is in the very low-risk category, showing a consistent and responsible profile that aligns with the low-risk national average (Z-score: -0.010). This performance indicates that the university is not overly reliant on its own journals for dissemination. Excessive dependence on in-house journals can create conflicts of interest and academic endogamy by bypassing independent external peer review. By favoring external channels, the institution demonstrates a commitment to global visibility and competitive validation, strengthening the credibility of its research output.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution exhibits total operational silence in this indicator with a Z-score of -1.186, a result significantly stronger than the already very low-risk national average of -0.515. This demonstrates an exemplary commitment to publishing substantive work. High rates of redundant output, or 'salami slicing,' indicate a practice of fragmenting studies into minimal units to artificially inflate productivity, which distorts the scientific evidence base. The university's extremely low score suggests its researchers are focused on producing coherent, significant contributions to knowledge rather than prioritizing publication volume.