Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for China Medical University (China), 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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
23,866
co-authored works, 5 years
817
partner universities
67
partner countries
413
sustained deep ties
2.69
collaboration impact (FWCI)
78%
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 #160 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #274, Neuroscience #351 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. China Medical University sits in the 69th percentile for influence and the 59th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 47 of 60 partners (78%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 16th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,095 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (China and United States) carry about 90% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-96 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harbin Medical University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.2). 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.

372
h-index of the joint research base
4.2M
citations to co-authored work
2.69
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
23,866
co-authored works, 2021-2025
32
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.

Influence69th pctReach28th pctDiversity22nd pctSustained28th pctImpact59th pctInternational16th pctBrokerage24th pct

China Medical University is strongest on influence (69th percentile), impact (59th) and sustained (28th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 47 of 60 partners (78%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (16th 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight69th pct+15.2
Impact18% weight59th pct+10.6
Sustained18% weight28th pct+5.0
Reach16% weight28th pct+4.5
Diversity16% weight22nd pct+3.5
International10% weight16th pct+1.6

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.

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#1000Dentistry160Nursing274Neuroscience351Immunology & Microbiol…388Medicine405Mathematics433
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

China Medical University's strongest connected fields are Dentistry #160, Nursing #274, Neuroscience #351. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Social Sciences, at world #1,095 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 #121 for connected research
90/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…1,101
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University975
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University751
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical Unive…738
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sichuan University727
Life Sciences
World #115 for connected research
90/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…295
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian Medical Univer…221
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University190
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University174
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian University of …147
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #937 for connected research
22/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeastern Universi…392
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian University of …89
China Medical Univers…85
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese…81
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…75
Social Sciences
World #1095 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University48
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical Unive…36
China Medical Univers…27
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…23
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian Medical Univer…21
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 yieldChinese Academy ofPeking UniversityNortheastern UniveHarbin Medical Uni
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harbin Medical University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.2): a consortium waiting to happen. Northeastern University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College1,389 3.6Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University1,154 4.3Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University917 4.7Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian Medical University838 3.3Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical University837 4.2Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sichuan University837 4.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeastern University732 2.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Medical University700 5.2High yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University of Science and Technology677 4.5Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jilin University622 4.2Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 22,797
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 1,590
TW 901
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 494
SA 431
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 286
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Japan 269
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 223

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College 1,389
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University 1,154
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University 917
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Dalian Medical University 838
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical University 837
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sichuan University 837
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeastern University 732
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Medical University 700

The network spans 67 countries and 817 universities, but the top two carry about 90% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (1 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.

πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-96 globally in Life 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-22 globally in Life 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-47 globally in Life 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.

Sheng Jing HospitalFourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical UniversityChina Medical University Beigang HospitalFirst Hospital of China Medical UniversityLiaoning Cancer Hospital & InstituteAviation General Hospital
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyMedicine

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.

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Ohio UniversityUnited States
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of Mining and TechnologyChina
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ University of HohenheimGermany
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical SciencesIR
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Tech UniversityChina
Cancer-related molecular mechanisms researchMicroRNA in disease regulationRNA modifications and cancerFerroptosis and cancer prognosisCircular RNAs in diseasesCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism

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 NUS 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 Harbin Medical University tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international gap and the social sciences 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 China Medical 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.