Turning the tables: A university league-table based on quality not quantity

Area of Science:

• Health and Medical Research
• Bibliometrics
• Research Evaluation

Background:

• International university rankings heavily influence governments, donors, and students.
• Current rankings prioritize research output (publications, citations), potentially promoting "publish or perish".
• This can incentivize poor research practices due to a focus on quantity over quality.

Purpose of the Study:

• To develop and assess a university ranking system based on good research practices.
• To reward researchers for citing reporting guidelines that enhance research completeness and transparency.
• To explore alternative metrics for university evaluation beyond traditional output measures.

Main Methods:

• Created university rankings based on the citation of reporting guidelines (EQUATOR Network).
• Utilized Scopus database to identify cited papers and author affiliations.
• Analyzed data from 2016 and 2017, including 14,408 papers and 47,876 affiliations.
• Employed bootstrap measures for uncertainty and clustering for rank interpretation.

Main Results:

• Generated cross-sectional university rankings for 2016 and 2017.
• Identified and ranked universities based on their adherence to reporting guidelines.
• Clustered universities into five groups to mitigate over-interpretation of minor rank differences.

Conclusions:

• Advocates for incorporating socially responsible criteria into university rankings.
• Suggests that valuing reporting guideline adherence could foster better international research practices.
• Proposes a shift from quantity-focused to quality- and transparency-focused university evaluation.