Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,948 studies31 sourcesUpdated 23 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Royal Society Open Science

Science-wide mapping of institutions based on affiliated authors' impact and research integrity proxies

  • John Ioannidis1,2
  • Jeroen Baas3
  • Roy Boverhof4
  • Cyril Voyant5
5 affiliations
  1. 1Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University 1 , Stanford, CA, USA
  2. 2Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University 2 , Stanford, CA, USA
  3. 3Elsevier BV 3 , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  4. 4Research Intelligence, Elsevier BV 4 , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  5. 5Centre Observation, Impacts, Energy (OIE), Mines Paris—PSL, Campus Pierre Laffitte 5 , F-06904 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

We aimed to generate institution-level data of indicators that may reflect, as proxies, the impact and the research integrity of the authors affiliated with them and that also adjust for institution size and scientific subfields where these authors work. We used the Scopus database to generate institution-level data on top-cited authors (according to a composite citation indicator) and three indicators that may reflect problems with research integrity: the total number of authorships in papers retracted for reasons other than publisher/journal errors, and subfield-adjusted proportions of top-cited authors who have high (>95% percentile) self-citation rates or high (>95% percentile) rates of publications in Scopus-discontinued titles. There was modest overlap among top institutions based on volume and based on number of top-cited authors. However, there was minimal overlap when institutions with the highest proportions of top-cited authors were considered; these included mostly research institutes and tech organizations and only a minority of universities. Institutions with the highest self-citation, discontinuation and retraction penalties clustered in specific countries such as Saudi Arabia, People's Republic of China, Malaysia, Iran, India and Indonesia. The publicly available datasets that we provide allow the exploration of institution-level research assessments that balance high impact against proxies of diverse aspects of research integrity.

Related

  1. Green Microbiology for Planetary Resilience: A Research Agenda for Microbial Sustainability Science.
    Adenike A Akinsemolu, Helen Onyeaka
    Environmental microbiology reportsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textHydrology & soilsEurope PMC
  2. Enhancing soil science research with multi-agent artificial intelligence systems
    Budiman Minasny, Alex McBratney, José Alexandre Melo Demattê +2
    Frontiers in SciencePeer-reviewedCC BYFull text5 citedEnvironmental science & pollutionHydrology & soilsOpenAlex
  3. The role of ponds in the retention of micro(nano)plastics, tyre wear particles and their leachates: current state of the science, research gaps and opportunities
    Stuart Cairns, Muhammad Junaid, Iain Robertson
    Environmental science : water research & technologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEnvironmental science & pollutionEurope PMCEurope PMCPMC
  4. Modeling Mosquito Dynamics and West Nile Virus Risk in Canada: A Systematic Mapping Review of Approaches and Research Gaps
    Joseph Baafi, Huaiping Zhu
    EcoEvoRxivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textEcologyEvolutionary biologyEcoEvoRxiv
  5. Systematic mapping of academic literature on REDD+ in Mexico: research gaps and ways forward
    Jovanka Špirić, María Liliana Ávalos-Rodríguez, Edgar Gregorio Leija-Loredo
    Environmental Research LettersPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textClimate scienceCrossref

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{ioannidis2026sciencewide,
  title = {{Science-wide mapping of institutions based on affiliated authors' impact and research integrity proxies}},
  author = {John Ioannidis and Jeroen Baas and Roy Boverhof and Cyril Voyant},
  journal = {Royal Society Open Science},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1098/rsos.260870},
  url = {https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsos/article/13/10/260870/483583/Science-wide-mapping-of-institutions-based-on},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Science-wide mapping of institutions based on affiliated authors' impact and research integrity proxies
AU  - John Ioannidis
AU  - Jeroen Baas
AU  - Roy Boverhof
AU  - Cyril Voyant
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/14
JO  - Royal Society Open Science
DO  - 10.1098/rsos.260870
UR  - https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsos/article/13/10/260870/483583/Science-wide-mapping-of-institutions-based-on
AB  - We aimed to generate institution-level data of indicators that may reflect, as proxies, the impact and the research integrity of the authors affiliated with them and that also adjust for institution size and scientific subfields where these authors work. We used the Scopus database to generate institution-level data on top-cited authors (according to a composite citation indicator) and three indicators that may reflect problems with research integrity: the total number of authorships in papers retracted for reasons other than publisher/journal errors, and subfield-adjusted proportions of top-cited authors who have high (>95% percentile) self-citation rates or high (>95% percentile) rates of publications in Scopus-discontinued titles. There was modest overlap among top institutions based on volume and based on number of top-cited authors. However, there was minimal overlap when institutions with the highest proportions of top-cited authors were considered; these included mostly research institutes and tech organizations and only a minority of universities. Institutions with the highest self-citation, discontinuation and retraction penalties clustered in specific countries such as Saudi Arabia, People's Republic of China, Malaysia, Iran, India and Indonesia. The publicly available datasets that we provide allow the exploration of institution-level research assessments that balance high impact against proxies of diverse aspects of research integrity.
SN  - 2054-5703
ER  -