The collaboration paradox: Why Saudi Arabia’s internationally co-authored research faces high retraction rates

Read the full article

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

This study examines the retraction patterns in Saudi Arabian research from 2014 to 2023. A bibliometric analysis of 343,588 Scopus-indexed publications reveals a sharp rise in retractions starting in 2020, reaching a peak of 7.5 retractions per thousand publications (7.5‰) in 2022. This rate is 2 to 3 times greater than the contemporaneous rates observed in China (3.9‰) and India (2.3‰). Notably, 78% of retractions involved internationally co-authored works, with these collaborations exhibiting retraction rates up to 13 times higher than the baseline rates of the partner countries. Notably, 66% of retracted publications had a corresponding author with a foreign affiliation, and 64% had a foreign-affiliated first author. Pakistan, India, Egypt, and China were the most frequent co-authoring countries in retracted papers. Compromised peer review, paper mills, and computer-generated content were identified as the primary causes. Strikingly, in 2022, 100% of Saudi retractions due to compromised peer review and 95% of those linked to paper mills originated from Hindawi journals. The temporal alignment between Saudi Arabia's incentive-driven research policies and the surge in retractions suggests underlying systemic integrity issues. To address this, we propose a five-point reform agenda focusing on incentive structures, collaborative safeguards, institutional oversight, publisher accountability, and global coordination against paper mills.

Article activity feed