Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Iowa (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
34,987
co-authored works, 5 years
1,087
partner universities
76
partner countries
858
sustained deep ties
2.36
collaboration impact (FWCI)
92%
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
  • Dentistry is the standout field. Ranked #44 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #112, Neuroscience #142 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on sustained and influence. University of Iowa sits in the 84th percentile for sustained and the 83rd for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 316 of 345 partners (92%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Impact is the softest pillar. At the 41st percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #750 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 85% 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: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-43 globally in Health Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Stanford University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.4). 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.

992
h-index of the joint research base
18.8M
citations to co-authored work
2.36
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
34,987
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.

Influence83rd pctReach79th pctDiversity57th pctSustained84th pctImpact41st pctInternational44th pctBrokerage63rd pct

University of Iowa is strongest on sustained (84th percentile), influence (83rd) and reach (79th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 316 of 345 partners (92%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Impact (41st 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% weight83rd pct+18.3
Impact18% weight41st pct+7.4
Sustained18% weight84th pct+15.1
Reach16% weight79th pct+12.6
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight44th pct+4.4

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.

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#1000Dentistry44Nursing112Neuroscience142Business, Management &…191Immunology & Microbiol…252Medicine256
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Iowa's strongest connected fields are Dentistry #44, Nursing #112, Neuroscience #142. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #750 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 #107 for connected research
91/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Michigan943
🇺🇸 Emory University890
🇺🇸 Washington University…885
🇺🇸 University of Califor…839
🇺🇸 Harvard University821
Life Sciences
World #284 for connected research
76/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Harvard University301
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…258
🇺🇸 Washington University…225
🇺🇸 Stanford University204
🇺🇸 University of Michigan200
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #750 for connected research
37/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 University of Colorad…912
🇫🇷 Université Paris-Sacl…785
🇺🇸 The Ohio State Univer…767
🇨🇿 Charles University760
🇺🇸 University of Wiscons…755
Social Sciences
World #396 for connected research
67/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Harvard University111
🇺🇸 Indiana University110
🇺🇸 University of Minneso…108
🇺🇸 University of Michigan108
🇺🇸 University of Wiscons…106
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 MichHarvard UniversityStanford UniversitUniversity of Minn
High yieldStandardLow yield

Stanford University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.4): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Minnesota, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.0: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇺🇸 University of Michigan1,218 3.7Standard
🇺🇸 Harvard University1,191 5.0Standard
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University1,169 3.9Standard
🇺🇸 Washington University in St. Louis1,060 3.8Standard
🇺🇸 Emory University1,025 4.1Standard
🇺🇸 University of Washington1,013 4.0Standard
🇺🇸 University of Utah999 3.6Standard
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco944 3.6Standard
🇺🇸 Stanford University933 5.4High yield
🇺🇸 Indiana University910 4.0Standard
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 47,583
🇨🇳 China 2,353
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 2,313
🇨🇦 Canada 1,864
🇩🇪 Germany 1,389
🇫🇷 France 1,378
🇦🇺 Australia 1,175
🇮🇹 Italy 811

Anchor partner institutions

🇺🇸 University of Michigan 1,218
🇺🇸 Harvard University 1,191
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University 1,169
🇺🇸 Washington University in St. Louis 1,060
🇺🇸 Emory University 1,025
🇺🇸 University of Washington 1,013
🇺🇸 University of Utah 999
🇺🇸 University of California, San Francisco 944

The network spans 76 countries and 1,087 universities, but the top two carry about 85% 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 Dentistry, the single strongest partnership is 🇺🇸 University of Michigan, with 42 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.

🇸🇬 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 Dentistry.

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 Dentistry.

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

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

King's College London is top-46 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Dentistry.

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

🇦🇺 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 Dentistry.

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 Iowa Stead Family Children’s HospitalAIB College of BusinessUniversity of Iowa Health CareHeartland Center for Occupational Safety and HealthUniversity of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer CenterIowa Geological Survey
Physics and Astronomy

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.

🇺🇸 Oregon State UniversityUnited States
🇺🇸 University of Tennessee at KnoxvilleUnited States
🇺🇸 Rice UniversityUnited States
🇧🇪 University of LiègeBelgium
🇬🇧 University of DundeeUnited Kingdom

Signature joint research

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

Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsAstro and Planetary Science

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 Stanford 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.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for University of Iowa.

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.