‘At risk’ universities point to need for systemic change

Thirty-two Indian universities have been flagged up as being among the most ‘at risk’ worldwide by a new Research Integrity Risk Index (RI²), which identifies academic institutions with systemic research irregularities.

The number is a notable increase from the initial seven Indian universities flagged when the study first examined the top 1,000 institutions with the most publications.

The RI² index, which is currently in preprint and pending peer review, utilises two main indicators to assess integrity risks in research output: the retraction rate per 1,000 publications based on data from 2022 to 2023 and the proportion of papers published in journals that have been delisted from major publication databases Scopus and Web of Science (2023 to 2024).

The indicators were specifically chosen for their clarity and documentation, intentionally avoiding ambiguous areas such as citation cartels or paper mills.

Institutions were categorised into five risk levels, with the ‘red flag’ group representing the top 5% of the most at-risk entities globally.

Lokman Meho, professor of library science at the American University of Beirut, who led the study said the chosen indicators reflect serious, well-documented breaches and offer a “conservative yet robust” diagnostic.

The index aims not to punish but to serve as an early warning system promoting transparency and academic reform, he said.

Red-flagged universities have “extreme anomalies across indicators that reflect systemic integrity risks requiring immediate scrutiny”, he said in his paper.

Pointing to India’s poor risk profile, Meho told University World News one key reason was the growing emphasis on quantitative metrics, like publication counts, citations, and the h-index of citations, for academic hiring and promotions, and university rankings.

“Without proper safeguards, these can incentivise low-quality or unethical research practices, such as publishing in weak journals or citation cartels. At the same time, many institutions lack robust systems to enforce research integrity, allowing the pressure to publish to outweigh adherence to ethical standards,” he explained.

Initially focused on 18 universities in India, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, the study was later expanded to include 1,500 of the world’s leading publishing institutions, with updated data collected on June 5, 2025.

This expansion revealed a concerning rise in problematic ‘publishing behaviours’, with the number of red-flagged universities globally increasing from 17 to 121. India accounted for 32 of these, followed by Saudi Arabia with 21.

Among the 32 flagged universities are: Amity University, Noida; Anna University, Chennai; Annamalai University, Chidambaram; Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow; JNTU (Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University), Anantapur and Hyderabad; Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology, Bhubaneswar; Lovely Professional University, Phagwara; Osmania University, Hyderabad; Symbiosis International University, Pune; and Vellore Institute of Technology, among others.

The case of SIMATS

Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS) in India’s southern city of Chennai is a case in point. From 2018 to 2019, a staggering 79.7% of its research output – 2,421 papers – was published in delisted journals, making it the worst globally in this regard. By 2023 to 2024, this number decreased to 874 papers, or 8.4% of its total output.

However, SIMATS still ranked fourth globally by volume and 14th in terms of the proportion of papers in delisted publications.

KL University in Andhra Pradesh saw a similar trend. The number of its papers in delisted publications declined from 2,550 (77.3%) in 2018 to 2019 to 1,576 (15.1%) in 2023 to 2024.

Other institutions, such as Lovely Professional University in Punjab and Chitkara University in Chandigarh, also reported high numbers of papers in delisted publications, along with GLA University in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, and Chandigarh University, Punjab.

Though not on the same scale, even well-regarded institutions like the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) – one of the country’s top-ranked universities – published 37 and 39 papers in delisted journals during 2018 to 2019 and 2023 to 2024, respectively.

According to Dr RK Kotnala, an eminent scientist and president of India’s research ethics watchdog the Society for Scientific Values, research misconduct in India has surged due to key policy shifts.

“In 2018, the UGC (University Grants Commission) decentralised misconduct investigations to universities and linked faculty promotions to publication output, triggering unethical practices,” Kotnala told University World News.

He added: “The rise of private universities further fuelled plagiarism, driven by a push for rankings and commercialisation. Meanwhile, the independent watchdog, the Society for Scientific Values (SSV), lost influence, weakening oversight. Together, these factors created an environment where the pressure to publish often outweighed ethical standards.”

Increase in retractions

While the proportion of delisted journal publications has decreased, retraction rates have surged dramatically.

For instance, the number of SIMATS’ retracted papers skyrocketed from just one in 2018 to 2019 to 154 in 2022 to 2023, placing SIMATS at the forefront of global retraction rankings, with a retraction rate of 46.8 per thousand articles in 2022. This improved to 16 per thousand in 2023 to 2024.

Dr Achal Agrawal, founder of India Research Watch, said the biggest area of concern in India’s high-risk institutions is lack of accountability.

“There are researchers with over 30 retractions for image manipulation who are still being promoted and rewarded. This sends a dangerous message that misconduct is acceptable,” he told University World News.

“Many universities offer financial incentives for high publication counts; some even threaten to cancel Saturdays (off) or fire faculty who don't publish enough. Such pressure drives researchers to take unethical shortcuts,” Agrawal noted.

Professor NV Varghese, distinguished visiting professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, and former vice-chancellor of the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) in New Delhi, told University World News.

“In many top-ranking private institutions, faculty face intense ‘publish or perish’ pressure, with promotions tied to Scopus-indexed publications. This has led to paid publishing and rising unethical practices, forcing even honest researchers to compromise,” he said.

He added: “In the social sciences, poor funding pushes reliance on secondary data, weakening research quality. Public institutions also face financial strain. Scientific research suffers from high costs and limited support. Without systemic reform, this pressure threatens the integrity of academic research.”

Other research integrity indicators

Several Indian institutions exhibited unusually high growth in research output between 2018 and 2019 and 2023 and 2024. For example, Chitkara University, Punjab, saw a staggering 766% increase in publication volume during that period, closely followed by Chandigarh University at 760%. In contrast, SIMATS’ research output grew 243%.

This is significantly higher than publication increases observed in control institutions, suggesting the possibility of metric-driven strategies rather than genuine growth in academic research, according to Meho.

The number of hyper-prolific authors – defined as those publishing over 40 papers annually – also increased. SIMATS had 16 such authors from 2018 to 2019, rising to 35 by 2023 to 2024, with 80% of their earlier output published in delisted journals.

Institutions like Chitkara and SIMATS have also emerged as citation hubs, contributing disproportionately to highly cited papers, enhancing their own and their peers’ citation metrics.

Need for systemic change

Academics noted the rising number of at-risk universities signals an urgent need for Indian academic institutions to recalibrate their research strategies, realigning their focus from quantity to quality and integrity.

“Improving research integrity in India requires both immediate and long-term reforms,” said Meho.

“In the short term, universities must revise incentives to reward quality over quantity and establish strong oversight mechanisms. Long term, we need a national code of conduct, proper misconduct investigation systems, and support for whistleblowers.”

Meho added: “Cultural change is key – ethical leadership and global best practices like the Hong Kong Principles must guide us. Tools like RI² can help identify risks early and shape evidence-based reforms. With public trust at stake, we can’t afford further delay.”

The Hong Kong Principles on research integrity were developed as part of the Sixth World Conference on Research Integrity, held at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) in June 2019.