Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Radboud University Nijmegen (Netherlands), 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 Europe · 417 universities benchmarked
56,700
co-authored works, 5 years
1,131
partner universities
81
partner countries
956
sustained deep ties
3.21
collaboration impact (FWCI)
94%
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
  • Psychology is the standout field. Ranked #26 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #30, Immunology & Microbiology #41 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on diversity and sustained. Radboud University Nijmegen sits in the 98th percentile for diversity and the 90th for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 333 of 356 partners (94%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Impact is the softest pillar. At the 83rd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #671 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Netherlands and United States) carry about 48% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Win The University of Queensland. World top-12. The University of Queensland is top-69 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 8.3). 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.

1,247
h-index of the joint research base
24.8M
citations to co-authored work
3.21
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
56,700
co-authored works, 2021-2025
90
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.

Influence87th pctReach89th pctDiversity98th pctSustained90th pctImpact83rd pctInternational90th pctBrokerage93rd pct

Radboud University Nijmegen is strongest on diversity (98th percentile), sustained (90th) and international (90th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 333 of 356 partners (94%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Impact (83rd 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% weight87th pct+19.1
Impact18% weight83rd pct+14.9
Sustained18% weight90th pct+16.2
Reach16% weight89th pct+14.2
Diversity16% weight98th pct+15.7
International10% weight90th pct+9.0

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#1000Psychology26Neuroscience30Immunology & Microbiolโ€ฆ41Dentistry42Biochem. & Mol. Biology59
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Radboud University Nijmegen's strongest connected fields are Psychology #26, Neuroscience #30, Immunology & Microbiology #41. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #671 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 #65 for connected research
95/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Maastricht University2,731
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdโ€ฆ2,485
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Groningโ€ฆ1,487
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht University1,401
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Erasmus University Roโ€ฆ1,302
Life Sciences
World #157 for connected research
87/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Maastricht University575
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdโ€ฆ567
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Groningโ€ฆ508
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht University492
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL484
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #671 for connected research
44/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdโ€ฆ902
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ Paris Citรฉ733
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ Paris-Saclโ€ฆ699
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Sorbonne Universitรฉ686
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง UCL588
Social Sciences
World #203 for connected research
83/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdโ€ฆ507
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht University483
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Vrije Universiteit Amโ€ฆ384
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Groningโ€ฆ331
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Tilburg University321
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 AmstMaastricht UniversEindhoven UniversiUniversity of Oxfo
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 8.3): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Amsterdam, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdam3,891 3.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Maastricht University3,557 3.0Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht University2,520 3.5Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Groningen2,403 4.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam2,268 3.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Erasmus University Rotterdam1,776 3.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช KU Leuven1,410 5.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London1,303 6.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Leiden University1,185 3.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Eindhoven University of Technology1,064 2.7Low yield
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‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Netherlands 21,473
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 14,671
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 11,555
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 9,731
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 5,980
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 5,199
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 3,282
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Belgium 3,220

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdam 3,891
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Maastricht University 3,557
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht University 2,520
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Groningen 2,403
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 2,268
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Erasmus University Rotterdam 1,776
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช KU Leuven 1,410
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London 1,303

The network spans 81 countries and 1,131 universities, but the top two carry about 48% 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 Psychology, the single strongest partnership is ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdam, with 202 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‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ 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 Psychology.

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

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-69 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Psychology.

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

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-538 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Psychology.

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

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego United States · world top-18

University of California San Diego is top-51 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Psychology.

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

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.

Catharina ZiekenhuisRadboud University Medical CenterMax Planck Institute for PsycholinguisticsRadboud Institute for Molecular Life SciencesMรกxima Medisch CentrumDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour
NeurosciencePhysics and AstronomyMedicine

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‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด University of OsloNorway
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht UniversityNetherlands
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of LeedsUnited Kingdom
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San FranciscoUnited States
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Uppsala UniversitySweden

Signature joint research

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

Neural dynamics and brain functionParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchAntifungal resistance and susceptibility

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 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 impact 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.

Immunology & Microbiology · candidate
with ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช University of Bonn
★ Anna C. Aschenbrenner

SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers profibrotic macrophage responses and lung fibrosis

2021 · 547 citations

Their most-cited joint work, on immune cells in cancer, has been cited 547 times and anchors a 199-paper partnership in immunology & microbiology.

See the Immunology & Microbiology candidates →
Psychology · candidate
with ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Amsterdam
★ Rogier Kievit

Theory Construction Methodology: A Practical Framework for Building Theories in Psychology

2021 · 390 citations

Their most-cited joint work, on mental health research topics, has been cited 390 times and anchors a 199-paper partnership in psychology.

See the Psychology candidates →
Neuroscience · candidate
with ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford
★ Robert Oostenveld

The Human Connectome Project: A retrospective

2021 · 312 citations

Their most-cited joint work, on functional brain connectivity studies, has been cited 312 times and anchors a 147-paper partnership in neuroscience.

See the Neuroscience 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 Radboud University Nijmegen.

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.