Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Universidad de Santiago de Chile (CL), 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.

◇ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Latin America · 65 universities benchmarked
9,412
co-authored works, 5 years
894
partner universities
76
partner countries
416
sustained deep ties
1.70
collaboration impact (FWCI)
91%
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
  • Nursing is the standout field. Ranked #439 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #458, Dentistry #471 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and diversity. Universidad de Santiago de Chile sits in the 70th percentile for international and the 57th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 76 of 83 partners (91%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 16th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #977 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (CL and United States) carry about 57% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Trinity College Dublin returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.7). 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.

268
h-index of the joint research base
0.9M
citations to co-authored work
1.70
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,412
co-authored works, 2021-2025
50
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.

Influence16th pctReach43rd pctDiversity57th pctSustained29th pctImpact17th pctInternational70th pctBrokerage61st pct

Universidad de Santiago de Chile is strongest on international (70th percentile), diversity (57th) and reach (43rd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 76 of 83 partners (91%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (16th 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 pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight16th pct+3.5
Impact18% weight17th pct+3.1
Sustained18% weight29th pct+5.2
Reach16% weight43rd pct+6.9
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight70th pct+7.0

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#1000Nursing439Neuroscience458Dentistry471Energy514Chemical Engineering536Physics & Astronomy579
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Universidad de Santiago de Chile's strongest connected fields are Nursing #439, Neuroscience #458, Dentistry #471. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #977 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 #862 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
University of Chile656
Pontificia Universida…216
🇧🇷 Universidade Federal …102
🇧🇷 Universidade de São P…65
🇵🇹 University of Lisbon53
Life Sciences
World #977 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
University of Chile400
Pontificia Universida…149
University of Concepc…46
🇺🇸 University of Califor…41
Universidad de Buenos…28
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #906 for connected research
24/100
Top collaboration partners
University of Chile831
Pontificia Universida…376
University of Concepc…157
🇪🇸 Universitat Politècni…55
🇮🇳 Saveetha University43
Social Sciences
World #668 for connected research
44/100
Top collaboration partners
University of Chile314
Pontificia Universida…141
🇧🇷 Universidade de São P…30
Universidad de Buenos…26
University of Concepc…23
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 ChilPontificia UniversUniversity of LisbHarvard University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Trinity College Dublin returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.7): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Chile, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
University of Chile2,037 1.8Low yield
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile816 2.0Low yield
University of Concepción265 2.4Standard
🇧🇷 Universidade de São Paulo144 3.5Standard
🇧🇷 Universidade Federal de São Paulo139 2.4Standard
Universidad de Buenos Aires111 3.1Standard
🇵🇹 University of Lisbon105 1.5Low yield
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco103 3.3Standard
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana97 2.8Standard
🇮🇪 Trinity College Dublin87 4.7High 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

CL 3,118
🇺🇸 United States 1,209
🇧🇷 Brazil 910
🇪🇸 Spain 801
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 597
🇫🇷 France 464
🇩🇪 Germany 284
CO 256

Anchor partner institutions

University of Chile 2,037
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 816
University of Concepción 265
🇧🇷 Universidade de São Paulo 144
🇧🇷 Universidade Federal de São Paulo 139
Universidad de Buenos Aires 111
🇵🇹 University of Lisbon 105
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco 103

The network spans 76 countries and 894 universities, but the top two carry about 57% 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.

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.

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

National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social 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

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

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social 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

🇬🇧 King's College London United Kingdom · world top-10

King's College London is top-48 globally in Social 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

🇸🇬 Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-280 globally in Social 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.

Social SciencesArts and HumanitiesChemistryMedicine

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.

🇨🇳 Donghua UniversityChina
🇨🇦 Polytechnique MontréalCanada
🇺🇸 Montana State UniversityUnited States
🇨🇳 Beijing Jiaotong UniversityChina
🇩🇪 University of WuppertalGermany
Political and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin AmericaCultural and Social Studies in Latin AmericaElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsEducation and Teacher TrainingObesity, Physical Activity, DietAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering

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 Trinity College Dublin tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the life 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 Universidad de Santiago de Chile.

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.