Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Nantong 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
28,476
co-authored works, 5 years
820
partner universities
62
partner countries
428
sustained deep ties
2.24
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
  • Strong on influence and impact. Nantong University sits in the 77th percentile for influence and the 36th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 122 of 141 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 13th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,018 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 94% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • 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.
  • Win UCL. World top-5. University College London is top-22 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Southeast University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.8). 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.

258
h-index of the joint research base
2.2M
citations to co-authored work
2.24
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
28,476
co-authored works, 2021-2025
21
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 pctReach29th pctDiversity13th pctSustained30th pctImpact36th pctInternational13th pctBrokerage19th pct

Nantong University is strongest on influence (77th percentile), impact (36th) and sustained (30th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 122 of 141 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (13th 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.

InflImpaSustReacEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight77th pct+16.9
Impact18% weight36th pct+6.5
Sustained18% weight30th pct+5.4
Reach16% weight29th pct+4.6
Diversity16% weight13th pct+2.1
International10% weight13th pct+1.3

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 #269 for connected research
78/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…1,579
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University900
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…686
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Xuzhou Medical College639
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University570
Life Sciences
World #155 for connected research
87/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…1,223
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…836
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University756
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University748
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University712
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #455 for connected research
62/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University397
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing University325
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Southeast University316
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…266
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jiangsu University255
Social Sciences
World #1018 for connected research
15/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…39
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…37
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Yangzhou University28
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University27
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing University24
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 yieldNanjing Medical UnSoochow UniversityPeking UniversitySoutheast Universi
High yieldStandardLow yield

Southeast University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.8): a consortium waiting to happen. Peking University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.2: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical University2,421 2.1Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University1,695 2.4Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University1,223 1.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University1,085 2.1Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University893 1.2Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Xuzhou Medical College890 1.8Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University871 2.0Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing University799 1.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jiangsu University788 2.4Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University763 1.7Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 35,835
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 2,329
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 634
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 611
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 570
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 316
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Japan 208
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 187

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical University 2,421
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University 1,695
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University 1,223
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University 1,085
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University 893
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Xuzhou Medical College 890
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University 871
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing University 799

The network spans 62 countries and 820 universities, but the top two carry about 94% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (0 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‡¬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

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-121 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.

Nantong Maternity and Child Health HospitalAffiliated Hospital of Nantong UniversitySecond People's Hospital of NanTongYancheng First People's HospitalTaizhou People's Hospital
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyMedicineNeuroscience

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.

Tarbiat Modares UniversityIR
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeast Normal UniversityChina
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Hubei UniversityChina
Al-Azhar UniversityEG
University of Novi SadRS
Cancer-related molecular mechanisms researchMicroRNA in disease regulationFerroptosis and cancer prognosisRNA modifications and cancerCircular RNAs in diseasesNerve injury and regeneration

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 University of Oxford 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 Southeast 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 Nantong 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.