Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Duke University (United States), a Platinum-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.

โ—† Platinum standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
71,507
co-authored works, 5 years
1,159
partner universities
81
partner countries
1,050
sustained deep ties
3.25
collaboration impact (FWCI)
95%
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
  • Economics, Econometrics & Finance is the standout field. Ranked #15 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #20, Medicine #22 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and diversity. Duke University sits in the 98th percentile for influence and the 98th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 449 of 475 partners (95%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 79th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #380 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 Singapore) carry about 73% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-43 globally in Health Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win KU Leuven. World top-21. KU Leuven is top-72 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harvard University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 6.9). 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.

1,407
h-index of the joint research base
29.7M
citations to co-authored work
3.25
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
71,507
co-authored works, 2021-2025
88
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.

Influence98th pctReach95th pctDiversity98th pctSustained97th pctImpact84th pctInternational79th pctBrokerage97th pct

Duke University is strongest on influence (98th percentile), diversity (98th) and sustained (97th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 449 of 475 partners (95%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (79th 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 Platinum band worldwide.
Influence22% weight98th pct+21.6
Impact18% weight84th pct+15.1
Sustained18% weight97th pct+17.5
Reach16% weight95th pct+15.2
Diversity16% weight98th pct+15.7
International10% weight79th pct+7.9

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#1000Economics, Econometricโ€ฆ15Neuroscience20Medicine22Biochem. & Mol. Biology25Agricultural & Biologiโ€ฆ25
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Duke University's strongest connected fields are Economics, Econometrics & Finance #15, Neuroscience #20, Medicine #22. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #380 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 #26 for connected research
98/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ NUS7,716
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ2,379
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University2,196
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ1,912
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ1,711
Life Sciences
World #87 for connected research
93/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ NUS1,961
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ957
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University835
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University507
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ487
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #380 for connected research
68/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Wuhan University1,236
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University935
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago877
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University876
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan763
Social Sciences
World #140 for connected research
88/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ NUS837
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Wuhan University691
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ606
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University471
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University405
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 yieldNUSUniversity of NortHarvard University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 6.9): a consortium waiting to happen. NUS, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore10,177 3.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill3,835 3.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University3,400 6.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University2,570 5.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Wuhan University2,551 3.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University2,494 6.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan2,108 5.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco2,097 5.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington1,971 5.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pennsylvania1,960 6.2Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 88,021
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Singapore 11,587
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 10,801
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 9,316
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 5,151
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 4,537
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 3,803
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 3,487

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore 10,177
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 3,835
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 3,400
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University 2,570
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Wuhan University 2,551
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University 2,494
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan 2,108
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco 2,097

The network spans 81 countries and 1,159 universities, but the top two carry about 73% 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 Economics, Econometrics & Finance, the single strongest partnership is ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore, with 118 joint works: the natural anchor for a flagship consortium.
Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 5

The research funding behind the network

โ‚ฌ3M31 projects
Horizon EuropeHorizon 2020

€3M across 31 funded projects from the European Commission, split €0M Horizon Europe and €3M Horizon 2020, every project traceable to the funder's own record (CORDIS). The fact file adds the ERC and the major national funders, each named and linked, never a single black-box platform.

Funding is shown next to the network because the two move together: the fundable opportunities below are chosen where a real programme already exists to pay for the bridge.

Source: funders' own award systems + CORDIS, awards active 2021–2025 · verified

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‡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 Economics, Econometrics & Finance.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช KU Leuven Belgium · world top-21

KU Leuven is top-72 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Economics, Econometrics & Finance.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ University of Zurich Switzerland · world top-23

University of Zurich is top-114 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Economics, Econometrics & Finance.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ UNSW Sydney Australia · world top-26

UNSW Sydney is top-84 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Economics, Econometrics & Finance.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

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.

Duke-NUS Medical SchoolDuke Children's Hospital & Health CenterDurham VA Medical CenterDuke University Health SystemDuke University HospitalDuke Kunshan UniversityHubbard Brook Long Term Ecological ResearchTriangle Center for Evolutionary Medicine
Physics and AstronomyEnvironmental ScienceEconomics, Econometrics and FinanceMedicine

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‡ฆ University of British ColumbiaCanada
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of SydneyAustralia
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช KU LeuvenBelgium
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ University of ZurichSwitzerland
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of CopenhagenDenmark

Signature joint research

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

Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHeart Failure Treatment and Management

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 Monash University 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 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.

Subject Award spotlight

Celebrating your significant contributions

We have identified the partnerships below as candidates for the Subject Awards, for a significant contribution to connected research. Each is anchored to a real, cited joint paper, with the lead author taken from that paper's own authorship record.

Medicine · candidate
with ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore
★ Sandeep S. Davรฉ

The 5th edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours: Lymphoid Neoplasms

2022 · 3,794 citations

Their most-cited joint work, on lymphoma diagnosis and treatment, has been cited 3,794 times and anchors a 6,412-paper partnership in medicine.

See the Medicine candidates →
These are candidates, not winners. The full slate is undergoing complete review by our editorial team ahead of the awards, and the Subject Awards are exclusive to partner universities.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for Duke 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 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.