Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Tanta University (EG), 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.

โ—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ Africa · 33 universities benchmarked
19,636
co-authored works, 5 years
897
partner universities
71
partner countries
470
sustained deep ties
1.90
collaboration impact (FWCI)
89%
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 international and reach. Tanta University sits in the 64th percentile for international and the 43rd for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 62 of 69 partners (89%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Impact is the softest pillar. At the 23rd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #903 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (EG and SA) carry about 72% 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Jiangsu University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 7.7). 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.

243
h-index of the joint research base
1.0M
citations to co-authored work
1.90
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
19,636
co-authored works, 2021-2025
41
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.

Influence25th pctReach43rd pctDiversity34th pctSustained37th pctImpact23rd pctInternational64th pctBrokerage41st pct

Tanta University is strongest on international (64th percentile), reach (43rd) and sustained (37th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 62 of 69 partners (89%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Impact (23rd 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 global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight25th pct+5.5
Impact18% weight23rd pct+4.1
Sustained18% weight37th pct+6.7
Reach16% weight43rd pct+6.9
Diversity16% weight34th pct+5.4
International10% weight64th pct+6.4

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 #245 for connected research
80/100
Top collaboration partners
Cairo University538
Alexandria University460
Al-Azhar University443
Mansoura University407
Ain Shams University376
Life Sciences
World #414 for connected research
65/100
Top collaboration partners
Alexandria University211
Al-Azhar University196
Menoufia University192
Cairo University178
Mansoura University161
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #566 for connected research
53/100
Top collaboration partners
Mansoura University307
Prince Sattam Bin Abdโ€ฆ278
Menoufia University263
King Saud University251
Alexandria University250
Social Sciences
World #903 for connected research
24/100
Top collaboration partners
Mansoura University49
Alexandria University44
Cairo University43
Menoufia University34
Benha University32
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 yieldCairo UniversityAlexandria UniversBenha UniversityPrincess Nourah bi
High yieldStandardLow yield

Jiangsu University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 7.7): a consortium waiting to happen. Benha University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
Cairo University1,096 2.6Standard
Alexandria University1,033 2.3Standard
Mansoura University1,005 2.0Standard
Menoufia University890 2.8Standard
Al-Azhar University795 2.3Standard
Ain Shams University784 2.1Standard
Zagazig University724 3.1Standard
Benha University666 1.9Low yield
King Saud University522 3.3Standard
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University461 2.6Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

EG 7,449
SA 3,297
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,530
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 1,098
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 602
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 355
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 348
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 339

Anchor partner institutions

Cairo University 1,096
Alexandria University 1,033
Mansoura University 1,005
Menoufia University 890
Al-Azhar University 795
Ain Shams University 784
Zagazig University 724
Benha University 666

The network spans 71 countries and 897 universities, but the top two carry about 72% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives.

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‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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 your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

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 your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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 your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-29 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

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.

Tanta University Hospital
EnergyDentistryMedicineMathematics

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‡ณ University of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of ToledoUnited States
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chengdu University of TechnologyChina
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช University of AugsburgGermany
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Donghua UniversityChina
Solar-Powered Water Purification MethodsSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsDental materials and restorationsLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsMembrane Separation Technologies

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 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 Jiangsu University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the impact 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 Tanta 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.