Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Dartmouth College (United States), a Silver-band university.  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.

○ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
24,592
co-authored works, 5 years
980
partner universities
76
partner countries
677
sustained deep ties
3.04
collaboration impact (FWCI)
87%
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
  • Health Professions is the standout field. Ranked #135 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #176, Earth & Planetary Sciences #215 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Dartmouth College sits in the 77th percentile for influence and the 75th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 117 of 135 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 41st percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #858 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 United Kingdom) carry about 85% 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 NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Stanford University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 7.2). 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.

748
h-index of the joint research base
7.0M
citations to co-authored work
3.04
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
24,592
co-authored works, 2021-2025
56
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.

Influence77th pctReach59th pctDiversity57th pctSustained64th pctImpact75th pctInternational41st pctBrokerage47th pct

Dartmouth College is strongest on influence (77th percentile), impact (75th) and sustained (64th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 117 of 135 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (41st 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 Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight77th pct+16.9
Impact18% weight75th pct+13.5
Sustained18% weight64th pct+11.5
Reach16% weight59th pct+9.4
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight41st pct+4.1

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#1000Health Professions135Neuroscience176Earth & Planetary Scie…215Psychology259Social Sciences279Immunology & Microbiol…286
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Dartmouth College's strongest connected fields are Health Professions #135, Neuroscience #176, Earth & Planetary Sciences #215. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #858 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 #347 for connected research
71/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Harvard University812
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…505
🇺🇸 University of Califor…450
🇺🇸 University of Washing…379
🇺🇸 Stanford University372
Life Sciences
World #603 for connected research
50/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Harvard University266
🇺🇸 Stanford University153
🇺🇸 University of Califor…149
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…143
🇺🇸 Yale University141
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #858 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Rensselaer Polytechni…2,419
🇺🇸 University of Massach…1,020
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…255
🇺🇸 Harvard University249
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…230
Social Sciences
World #615 for connected research
49/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Harvard University239
🇺🇸 Stanford University216
🇺🇸 University of Wiscons…127
🇺🇸 Yale University120
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…107
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 yieldHarvard UniversityJohns Hopkins UnivUniversity of PennUniversity of Utah
High yieldStandardLow yield

Stanford University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 7.2): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Utah, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.6: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇺🇸 Harvard University1,312 4.8Standard
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University864 5.2Standard
🇺🇸 Stanford University695 7.2High yield
🇺🇸 University of Washington626 5.0Standard
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco623 4.5Standard
🇺🇸 Yale University576 5.3Standard
🇺🇸 University of Michigan550 4.9Standard
🇺🇸 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill510 4.7Standard
🇺🇸 University of Wisconsin–Madison470 6.0Standard
🇺🇸 University of California San Diego466 4.7Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

🇺🇸 United States 28,425
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 1,959
🇨🇦 Canada 1,888
🇩🇪 Germany 849
🇫🇷 France 827
🇨🇳 China 778
🇦🇺 Australia 603
🇪🇸 Spain 465

Anchor partner institutions

🇺🇸 Harvard University 1,312
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University 864
🇺🇸 Stanford University 695
🇺🇸 University of Washington 626
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco 623
🇺🇸 Yale University 576
🇺🇸 University of Michigan 550
🇺🇸 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 510

The network spans 76 countries and 980 universities, but the top two carry about 85% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Asia-Pacific white-space (1 of the region's 34 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.

🇭🇰 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 Health Professions.

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

🇸🇬 National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Health Professions.

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

🇭🇰 Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-132 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Health Professions.

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

🇦🇺 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 Health Professions.

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.

Hubbard Brook Long Term Ecological ResearchDartmouth HealthCenter for Open Neuroscience
Physics and AstronomyEnvironmental ScienceEarth and Planetary Sciences

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.

🇺🇸 University of DelawareUnited States
🇮🇹 University of Bari Aldo MoroItaly
🇩🇪 Justus-Liebig-Universität GießenGermany
🇺🇸 University of New MexicoUnited States
🇺🇸 University of Colorado Anschutz Medical CampusUnited States
Ionosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaSeismic Waves and AnalysisSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsEarthquake Detection and AnalysisGeophysics and Gravity Measurements

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 Asia-Pacific 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 Stanford University 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 Dartmouth College.

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.