Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Augusta University (United States), 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 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
9,598
co-authored works, 5 years
808
partner universities
70
partner countries
407
sustained deep ties
2.20
collaboration impact (FWCI)
84%
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
  • Dentistry is the standout field. Ranked #36 in the world for connected research, with Health Professions #481, Neuroscience #544 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Augusta University sits in the 41st percentile for influence and the 34th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 93 of 111 partners (84%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Reach is the softest pillar. At the 27th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,162 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United States and China) carry about 88% 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: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-29 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harvard University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.8). 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.

483
h-index of the joint research base
3.7M
citations to co-authored work
2.20
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,598
co-authored works, 2021-2025
28
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.

Influence41st pctReach27th pctDiversity31st pctSustained27th pctImpact34th pctInternational32nd pctBrokerage7th pct

Augusta University is strongest on influence (41st percentile), impact (34th) and international (32nd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 93 of 111 partners (84%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Reach (27th 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveInteEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight41st pct+9.0
Impact18% weight34th pct+6.1
Sustained18% weight27th pct+4.9
Reach16% weight27th pct+4.3
Diversity16% weight31st pct+5.0
International10% weight32nd pct+3.2

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.

Visualisation 2

Where you lead the world, by field

Each subject placed on a log scale of world rank (1 to 1,195). The further left, the more globally central. Gold marks a top-50 standout, blue a solid position.

#1#10#100#1000Dentistry36Health Professions481Neuroscience544Immunology & Microbiolโ€ฆ561Medicine615Biochem. & Mol. Biology639
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Augusta University's strongest connected fields are Dentistry #36, Health Professions #481, Neuroscience #544. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,162 in the deep-dive below, is the clear at-risk area, exactly the gap this chart surfaces.

Source: subject-level indices, 26 fields, minimum 50-university gate

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 #433 for connected research
64/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University319
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia310
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Alabamaโ€ฆ205
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University196
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Duke University193
Life Sciences
World #790 for connected research
34/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia104
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University99
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University81
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Alabamaโ€ฆ61
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ58
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1162 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia29
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Western University24
King Saud University19
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Air Force Medical Uniโ€ฆ19
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southwest Jiaotong Unโ€ฆ16
Social Sciences
World #1056 for connected research
12/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia38
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University30
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ27
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia State Universโ€ฆ26
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University26
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 yieldUniversity of GeorEmory UniversityHarvard University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.8): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Georgia, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.0: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia413 2.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University384 2.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University239 4.8High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Duke University207 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Alabama at Birmingham195 2.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University184 3.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Medical University of South Carolina180 2.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco160 2.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington157 2.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill155 2.4Standard
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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 9,252
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 694
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 388
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 304
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 251
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 221
EG 122
IR 120

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia 413
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University 384
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 239
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Duke University 207
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Alabama at Birmingham 195
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University 184
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Medical University of South Carolina 180
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco 160

The network spans 70 countries and 808 universities, but the top two carry about 88% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Middle East white-space (0 of the region's 2 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

In Dentistry, the single strongest partnership is ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น University of Rome Tor Vergata, with 20 joint works: the natural anchor for a flagship consortium.
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 Dentistry.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-29 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Dentistry.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-110 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Dentistry.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-43 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Dentistry.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

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.

Charlie Norwood VA Medical CenterAugusta University HealthGeorgia Regents Medical Center
DentistryMedicineNeuroscience

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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texas at El PasoUnited States
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Providence CollegeUnited States
MIT UniversityMK
University of NigeriaNG
Universidad de LondresMX

Signature joint research

The most-cited work produced with partners, each verifiable.

Dental materials and restorationsHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersNitric Oxide and Endothelin EffectsEndodontics and Root Canal TreatmentsDental Erosion and TreatmentNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

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 Middle East 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 Harvard University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the reach 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 Augusta University.

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 peers.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, Tuesday 25 August 2026 to be included at the 15 September launch.

See the full enhanced fact file → Claim & verify yours

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 peers.

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 peers with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 170,000 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

170,000
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 15 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.