Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for All India Institute of Medical Sciences (India), ranked in the global index.  See a world-leading example (Oxford) →

The enhanced fact file

Your entire collaboration network, read like a strategist would.

Not a scorecard. A dossier that tells a university leader exactly where the strengths, the risks and the fundable opportunities are, every figure sourced from the open research record.

โ—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
35,514
co-authored works, 5 years
866
partner universities
78
partner countries
581
sustained deep ties
1.32
collaboration impact (FWCI)
92%
of partners non-redundant

The one-screen strategic read

Where you stand, at a glance.

The first thing a leader needs is not more data, it is a verdict. Three strengths to lead with, three challenges to manage, three opportunities to act on, each drawn straight from the network below.

Strengths
  • Strong on diversity and sustained. All India Institute of Medical Sciences sits in the 71st percentile for diversity and the 53rd for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 62 of 67 partners (92%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 6th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,083 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (India and United States) carry about 69% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-146 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win University of Edinburgh. World top-9. University of Edinburgh is top-147 globally in Health Sciences. Route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. UCL returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 6.6). Formalise it into a funded consortium to compound impact, not just volume.

Scholarly weight

The impact behind the network

Collaboration only counts if the work lands. This is the citation weight of everything produced with partners, the substance under the network.

450
h-index of the joint research base
3.8M
citations to co-authored work
1.32
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
35,514
co-authored works, 2021-2025
36
collaboration efficiency, impact per tie

Visualisation 1

Your collaboration profile

Seven pillars, each shown as a global percentile. The dashed ring marks the top-decile benchmark; anything inside it is a genuine, defensible strength.

Influence39th pctReach37th pctDiversity71st pctSustained53rd pctImpact10th pctInternational6th pctBrokerage88th pct

All India Institute of Medical Sciences is strongest on diversity (71st percentile), sustained (53rd) and influence (39th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 62 of 67 partners (92%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (6th percentile), the softest of the six and the clearest place to build.

Source: the open global research record, co-authored works 2021–2025, fractional counting

The anatomy of your standing

Exactly what your position is built from

Six pillars, each weighted, combine into one standing index. Nothing is hidden: this is the entire calculation, in a single bar.

InflSustReacDiveEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight39th pct+8.6
Impact18% weight10th pct+1.8
Sustained18% weight53rd pct+9.5
Reach16% weight37th pct+5.9
Diversity16% weight71st pct+11.4
International10% weight6th pct+0.6

Brokerage is reported alongside as a diagnostic, not folded into the score, so a university cannot inflate its standing simply by publishing widely. It measures whether you connect communities that would otherwise stay apart.

Discipline deep-dive

How you collaborate, faculty by faculty

The same network split into its four broad domains, each with its world rank for connected research and the five partners it leans on most. This is the view a dean or pro-vice-chancellor acts on.

Health & Medicine
World #17 for connected research
99/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Instituโ€ฆ1,310
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ913
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi901
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical โ€ฆ817
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ390
Life Sciences
World #237 for connected research
80/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi215
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Instituโ€ฆ172
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ150
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ110
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical โ€ฆ109
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1083 for connected research
9/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ236
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi57
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ53
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical โ€ฆ35
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Instituโ€ฆ27
Social Sciences
World #691 for connected research
42/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Instituโ€ฆ105
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ100
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical โ€ฆ89
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi78
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University47
Source: domain-level co-authorship, partner institutions 2021–2025

Visualisation 3

Which partnerships actually pay off

Every anchor partner plotted by collaboration volume against the citation impact of the joint work. The prize quadrant is top-right: high volume and high impact. The bottom-right is the trap: a lot of output, little impact.

Joint works (collaboration volume) →Impact (FWCI) →high yieldPost Graduate InstUniversity of DelhJohns Hopkins UnivAcademy of Scienti
High yieldStandardLow yield

UCL returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 6.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.1: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research1,537 2.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi1,220 1.5Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University1,123 1.3Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical Sciences973 1.3Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Delhi657 1.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Manipal Academy of Higher Education371 2.3Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London294 6.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University286 8.8High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University192 9.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine186 2.8Low yield
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 6,899
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 4,274
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 2,024
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 747
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 733
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 611
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 499
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 486

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research 1,537
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi 1,220
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University 1,123
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Institute of Medical Sciences 973
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Delhi 657
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Manipal Academy of Higher Education 371
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London 294
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 286

The network spans 78 countries and 866 universities, but the top two carry about 69% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (10 of the region's 100 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 6

The partners to win next

Not a generic wish-list. Globally central universities you are not yet deeply partnered with, each with the reason it matters and the specific programme that would fund the collaboration.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-146 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-147 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-69 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-538 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

Source: network white-space analysis + funder-programme mapping

The research base

The ecosystem behind the collaboration

A partnership does not plug into a name, it plugs into a base: the affiliated hospitals, presses, institutes and archives, and the research themes where the joint work concentrates.

All India Institute of Medical Sciences RaipurAll India Institute of Medical Sciences JodhpurAll India Institute of Medical Sciences BhopalAll India Institute of Medical Sciences BhubaneswarDR. B.R.A. Institute Rotary Cancer HospitalAll India Institute of Medical Sciences RishikeshAll India Institute of Medical Sciences GuwahatiAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, Deoghar
Medicine

Context

Your competitive set, and your signature research

Benchmarked against

The named peer group your fact file compares you to, pillar by pillar and subject by subject.

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Anhui UniversityChina
Qassim UniversitySA
Instituto Politรฉcnico NacionalMX
University of NairobiKE
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at CharlotteUnited States
Glaucoma and retinal disordersTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyTracheal and airway disordersIntraocular Surgery and LensesCongenital Heart Disease StudiesCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

From insight to action

A 90-day plan, written from the data.

The dossier ends where a strategy meeting begins: three moves, sequenced, each pointing back to a specific finding above.

0-30 days
Name the target

Adopt HKU and a Europe hub as formal partnership targets; brief the relevant deans with the joint white-space evidence.

30-60 days
Open the funding route

Scope the specific programme for each target, and turn the UCL tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international gap and the physical sciences & engineering weakness; set a diversification target for the long tail; and secure an editorial feature in the reputation-survey window.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for All India Institute of Medical Sciences.

Everything above is the open view. The full partner fact file goes further: every ranked subject and subfield, the complete partner ledger with yield, your named academics and their signature work, the funder-by-funder route map for each target, and this same dossier on up to ten named rivals.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, 22 July 2026 to be included at the 1 September launch.

Claim your fact file →

Free to claim and verify your data. No obligation. Your ranking is unaffected by partnership, and always will be.

Exclusive to partners

Plus this same dossier on up to 10 of your rivals.

Every partnership includes the full intelligence on your named competitive set, their strengths, their funders, their white-space, so you can see exactly where you lead and where to close the gap. Two rivals with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 172,000 academics, with full reporting.

Partnership also places your research as editorial features in the Research Network Report, our newsletter to a verified global academic audience, timed to the reputation-survey season. Every send comes with a full performance report: opens, clicks and geography, benchmarked against the edition.

The Research Network Report

172,000
verified academic subscribers worldwide
Nov–Jan
timed to the reputation-survey season
Full report
opens, clicks and geography on every feature

See your own dossier, built for your university.

Submit your data and we will build and review your enhanced fact file with you, then show exactly how a partnership turns it into advantage, before the index goes public on 1 September 2026.

Request a partnership conversation →
Global Research Partnerships · globalresearchpartnerships.com/rci · Built on the open global research record and the award data of the world's major funders. Methodology.