Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (United States), a Silver-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.

○ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
29,241
co-authored works, 5 years
958
partner universities
78
partner countries
681
sustained deep ties
2.83
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
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics is the standout field. Ranked #112 in the world for connected research, with Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology #150, Medicine #156 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and diversity. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus sits in the 84th percentile for influence and the 71st for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 112 of 129 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 29th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,152 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 China) carry about 87% 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: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Pennsylvania returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 9.0). 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.

615
h-index of the joint research base
4.3M
citations to co-authored work
2.83
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
29,241
co-authored works, 2021-2025
49
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.

Influence84th pctReach55th pctDiversity71st pctSustained64th pctImpact66th pctInternational29th pctBrokerage19th pct

University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus is strongest on influence (84th percentile), diversity (71st) and impact (66th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 112 of 129 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (29th 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight84th pct+18.5
Impact18% weight66th pct+11.9
Sustained18% weight64th pct+11.5
Reach16% weight55th pct+8.8
Diversity16% weight71st pct+11.4
International10% weight29th pct+2.9

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#1000Pharmacology, Toxicolo…112Biochem. & Mol. Biology150Medicine156Health Professions195Immunology & Microbiol…213Dentistry234
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus's strongest connected fields are Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #112, Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology #150, Medicine #156. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,152 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 #168 for connected research
86/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…6,611
🇺🇸 Harvard University1,104
🇺🇸 University of Califor…947
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…939
🇺🇸 University of Washing…872
Life Sciences
World #389 for connected research
68/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…1,750
🇺🇸 Harvard University406
🇺🇸 University of Washing…326
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…323
🇺🇸 University of North C…322
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1152 for connected research
4/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…388
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…117
🇺🇸 Harvard University92
🇺🇸 University of North C…69
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…69
Social Sciences
World #890 for connected research
26/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…593
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…136
🇺🇸 University of Califor…106
🇺🇸 Harvard University100
🇺🇸 University of Washing…100
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 ColoHarvard UniversityUniversity of Penn
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Pennsylvania returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 9.0): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Colorado Denver, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.3: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇺🇸 University of Colorado Denver8,119 2.3Low yield
🇺🇸 Harvard University1,430 6.3Standard
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco1,230 5.1Standard
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University1,228 4.9Standard
🇺🇸 University of Washington1,143 4.8Standard
🇺🇸 Stanford University1,035 5.7Standard
🇺🇸 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill950 4.4Standard
🇺🇸 University of Michigan904 5.3Standard
🇺🇸 University of Utah814 3.9Standard
🇺🇸 University of Pennsylvania802 9.0High 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

🇺🇸 United States 47,153
🇨🇳 China 2,638
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 2,223
🇨🇦 Canada 1,769
🇩🇪 Germany 1,180
🇦🇺 Australia 966
🇮🇹 Italy 817
🇫🇷 France 813

Anchor partner institutions

🇺🇸 University of Colorado Denver 8,119
🇺🇸 Harvard University 1,430
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco 1,230
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University 1,228
🇺🇸 University of Washington 1,143
🇺🇸 Stanford University 1,035
🇺🇸 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 950
🇺🇸 University of Michigan 904

The network spans 78 countries and 958 universities, but the top two carry about 87% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (10 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.

🇭🇰 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 Medicine.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

🇸🇬 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 Medicine.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

🇭🇰 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 Medicine.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

🇦🇺 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 Medicine.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

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.

University of Colorado HospitalUniversity of Colorado Cancer CenterRocky Mountain Advanced Computing Consortium
MedicineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyImmunology and Microbiology

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.

🇩🇪 Justus-Liebig-Universität GießenGermany
🇺🇸 Dartmouth CollegeUnited States
🇺🇸 University of New MexicoUnited States
🇫🇮 Tampere UniversityFinland
🇺🇸 University of South CarolinaUnited States
Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes and associated disordersPancreatic function and diabetesImmune Cell Function and InteractionBirth, Development, and HealthLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations

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 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 University of Pennsylvania 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.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.

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.