The reliance on the number of publications rather than the quality of research skewed the rankings in favour of institutions that prioritised quantity over impactful, high-quality research.
Published Feb 17, 2025 | 7:00 AM ⚊ Updated Feb 17, 2025 | 7:00 AM
Representative image of a medical student
Synopsis: The study published in the Indian Journal of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery said Indian medical education institutions were lagging in research output and global reputation, though they excelled in teaching.
A recent study has presented a grim picture of medical education in India, even as the country is planning to add 75,000 more medical seats in the next five years.
The study poses a question of quality over quantity even as the Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced in her 1 February Budget speech that the government had added almost 1.1 lakh undergraduate and post-graduate medical education seats in 10 years, “an increase of 130 percent”.
“In the next year, 10,000 additional seats will be added in medical colleges and hospitals, towards the goal of adding 75,000 seats in the next five years,” she added.
The study, published in the Indian Journal of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, however, said that while medical colleges in the country excelled in teaching, they alarmingly lagged others in research output and global reputation.
The findings, drawn from the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) 2024 data, underscored systemic disparities threatening India’s aspirations to become a global healthcare leader.
A group of faculty members from various Indian medical colleges conducted the study, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Top Indian Medical Colleges across Key Domains: Analysis of National Institutional Ranking Framework 2024 Rankings.”
It analysed data from the top 50 medical colleges according to the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) 2024, which has become a benchmark for evaluating the quality and performance of medical institutions in the country since its launch in November 2015.
Researchers calculated domain-wise scores. The highest scores were recorded for Teaching, Learning, and Resources (TLR) and Graduation Outcomes (GO), reflecting strong educational infrastructure and student success.
However, the lowest scores were for Research and Professional Practice (RP) and Perception (PR), underscoring difficulties in establishing strong academic reputations and producing high-impact research.
While institutions like AIIMS (Delhi), PGIMER (Chandigarh), and Christian Medical College (Vellore) dominated the top 10, a broader analysis of the top 50 colleges revealed deep-rooted inequities.
Despite their strength in education, Indian medical institutions struggled significantly in research output and professional reputation. Research and Professional Practices (RP) and Perception (PR) received the lowest scores, 36.46 and 33.41, respectively.
Several factors contributed to this deficiency, the study stated:
“Indian medical institutions often lag in research and innovation due to several factors, including inadequate funding, limited access to advanced research infrastructure, and a lack of strong institutional focus on research activities,” the authors of the study noted.
“In addition, the heavy emphasis on clinical teaching and patient care in medical education can overshadow the importance of research, leading to fewer incentives for faculty and students to engage in innovative projects,” the article stated.
“Bureaucratic hurdles, insufficient collaboration with global research institutions, and challenges in securing research grants further exacerbate the issue, resulting in lower research output and innovation compared to global standards,” it added.
Only a handful of institutions—mainly AIIMS, PGIMER, CMC Vellore, and NIMHANS—contributed over 25 percent of research publications. Over 50 percent of colleges produced negligible or no research.
“The four most productive institutions alone contributed over a quarter of the total publications. This reflects institutions’ strong research capabilities, better access to resources, and likely greater emphasis on research activities,” the authors found.
“In contrast, the majority of institutions, particularly those classified as low and least productive, contributed relatively few publications, even no publications,” they said.
It also raised concerns over how research output was being measured and reported in the rankings. The reliance on the number of publications rather than the quality of research skewed the rankings in favor of institutions that prioritised quantity over impactful, high-quality research.
Many Indian medical colleges lacked a robust peer-review culture, and there were concerns about publications in predatory journals, where researchers might publish to meet institutional quotas rather than for genuine scientific advancement.
Additionally, the high costs of publishing in reputed international journals limited the accessibility of Indian researchers to top-tier platforms, affecting global visibility and citations.
“This disparity suggests that many institutions may face challenges such as limited funding, inadequate research infrastructure, or a lack of emphasis on research publication as part of their academic culture. A high fee for open-access publication might further inhibit many researchers from publishing in fully open-access international journals,” the authors said.
The study found a strong positive correlation between research output (RP scores) and institutional rankings, with RP emerging as the most influential factor in determining an institution’s overall ranking. This suggested that institutions producing more research tend to rank higher in the NIRF.
Perception (PR) also played a significant role, as the reputation of an institution among peers, employers, and the public influenced its ranking. While Outreach and Inclusivity (OI) and Graduation Outcomes (GO) were important, their contribution to rankings was not as statistically significant as Research and Professional Practices (RP).
This correlation underscored the critical importance of research in elevating the status and recognition of medical institutions, both nationally and internationally.
To improve research output, the researchers suggested that fostering grassroots-level public health research could be an effective strategy. India has been facing diverse health challenges, ranging from communicable diseases to non-communicable conditions, specific to the country’s demographic and socioeconomic context.
Strengthening public health research through collaborations with medical institutions across the country could enhance health outcomes, bridge disparities, and encourage a culture of research in medical colleges. Such initiatives would not only improve rankings but also contribute to better healthcare policies and practices that were tailored to India’s unique needs.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
