Strides in Development of Medical Education

Document Type : Original Article


1 Ph.D. in Health Policy, Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacoeconomics, and Management, School of Pharmacy, International Campus, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. Candidate of Medical Education, Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Internal Medicine Specialist, Professor, Department of Medical Education, Head of Center for Educational Research in medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Ph.D. in Biomechanics, Associate Professor, Department of Ergonomics, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background Based on the plan of revolution and innovation in medical education that was issued by the Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education, and the extensive role of such programs in the qualitative promotion of universities, The academic ranking of world universities is of great importance, since the qualitative and quantitative implementation of academic ranking can influence the realization of the university’s goals. Hence, the current study aimed at collecting data about the academic ranking of world universities as well as its criteria and indices and their relationship with globalization. Methods To gain access to reputable databases in university ranking, an extensive search was performed in Google Scholar. Thereafter, after getting access to reputable databases such as Shanghai Jiao Tong University (SJTU), Times higher education world University ranking (THE), Quacquarelli Symonds world University rankings (QS), Webometric, and Islamic world science citation center (ISC), data were collected and classified. Results Based on the collected data, the history of university rankings and ranking systems, as well as criteria and indices pertaining to the academic ranking of world universities, was derived, and the specificities of the criteria and indices were discussed. Conclusions University rankings are usually performed on a combination of performance-associated indices and criteria. Efforts to achieve a desirable position based on the criteria and indices of the ranking system play an important role in the promotion of educational quality and globalization.


  1. Khorasani A, Zamani Manesh H. Effective strategies in internationalization of Universities and institutes of higher education in Iran [In Persian]. Educ Strategy Med Sci. 2012;5(3):183–9.
  2. Pooragha B. Packages of the evolution and innovation in medical sciences education: Based on higher education area health [In Persian]. 2016. Available from:
  3. Khosrowjerdi M, Zeraatkar N. A review of outcomes of seven world university ranking systems [In Persian]. J Inf Process Manag.2012;28(1):71–84.
  4. Liu NC. The story of academic ranking of world universities. Int High Educ. 2015;(54).
  5. Smolentseva A. In search of world-class universities: The case of Russia. Int High Educ. 2015;(58).
  6. Soh K. What theOveralldoesn’t tell about world university rankings: examples from ARWU, QSWUR, and THEWUR in 2013. J High Educ Policy Manag. 2015;37(3):295–307. doi: 10.1080/1360080x.2015.1035523.
  7. Aguillo IF, Bar-Ilan J, Levene M, Ortega JL. Comparing university rankings. Scientometrics. 2010; 85(1): 243–56. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0190-z.
  8. Sangam S, Bagalkoti V, editors. Rankings of Indian Universities, A Scientometrics Analysis. Proceedings of the 10th International Caliber, 2015 Mar 12-14. Gujarat, India. 2015. p. 182–91.
  9. Docampo D, Cram L. On the internal dynamics of the Shanghai ranking. Scientometrics. 2013; 98(2): 1347–66. doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1143-0.
  10. Liu NC. Academic Ranking of World Universities. 2016. Available from:
  11. Liu NC, Cheng Y, Liu L. Academic ranking of world universities using scientometrics -A comment to the “Fatal Attraction”. Scientometrics. 2005;64(1):101–9. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0241-z.
  12. Akbulut U. University Ranking by Academic Performance. Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University; 2015.
  13. Buela-Casal G, Gutiérrez-Martínez O, Bermúdez-Sánchez MP, VadilloMuñoz O. Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics. 2007;71(3):349–65. doi: 10.1007/s11192-007-1653-8.
  14. Dobrota M, Bulajic M, Bornmann L, Jeremic V. A new approach to the QS university ranking using the composite I-distance indicator: Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol.2016; 67(1): 200–11. doi: 10.1002/asi.23355.
  15. Jeremic V, Jovanovic-Milenkovic M. Evaluation of Asian university rankings: position and perspective of leading Indian higher education institutions. Curr Sci. 2014;106(12):1647–53.
  16. Grundy P. World University Rankings. 2016. Available from: http://www.
  17. Hazelkorn E. Globalization, internationalization and rankings. Int High Educ. 2015;(53).
  18. Thelwall M. Bibliometrics to webometrics. J Inf Sci. 2008;34(4):605–21. doi: 10.1177/0165551507087238.
  19. Montazer G, Khanizad R, editors. Reflection on the scientific status of Iran selective universities of in the world ranking system, 2016 April 14 [In Persian]. Proceedings of the National Conference on Higher Education. Tehran, Iran. 2016.
  20. Islam MA, Alam MS. Webometric study of private universities in Bangladesh. Malaysian J Library Inf Sci. 2011;16(2):115–26.
  21. Daraio C, Bonaccorsi A. Beyond university rankings? Generating new indicators on universities by linking data in open platforms. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2016. doi: 10.1002/asi.23679.
  22. Suby MT. he 2013 (ISC)2 global information security workforce study. McLean, Virginia: Booz Allen Hamilton; 2013.
  23. Goodall A. The Leaders of the World’s Top 100 Universities. Int High Educ. 2015;(42). doi: 10.6017/ihe.2006.42.7877.
  24. Osunade O, Ogundele CO. Valuation of the university of Ibadan website using webometric ranking parametars. Transnation J Sci Technol. 2012;2(3):66–78.
  25. Aksnes DW, Schneider JW, Gunnarsson M. Ranking national research systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods. J Inf. 2012;6(1):36–43. doi:


  1. Aguillo IF, Ortega JL, Fernández M, Utrilla AM. Indicators for a webometric ranking of open access repositories. Scientometrics. 2010;82(3):477–86. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0183-y.
  2. Ameri R. Higher Education and Quality Assurance in Iran: A Brief Survey. Tehran, Iran: Ministry of Science, Research and Technology (MSRT); 2016. Available from:


  1. Sakhtemanian Z. Knowledge production status and ranking system for universities. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University; 2016.
  2. Horta H. Global and national prominent universities: internationalization, competitiveness and the role of the State. High Educ. 2009;58(3):387–405. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9201-5.
  3. Delgado-Márquez BL, Hurtado-Torres NE, Bondar Y. Internationalization of higher education: Theoretical and empirical investigation of its influence on university institution rankings. RUSC. Univ Knowl Soc J. 2011;8(2):101. doi: 10.7238/rusc.v8i2.1069.