Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Weill Cornell Medicine (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.

โ—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
20,564
co-authored works, 5 years
938
partner universities
76
partner countries
625
sustained deep ties
3.52
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
  • Immunology & Microbiology is the standout field. Ranked #82 in the world for connected research, with Medicine #113, Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology #131 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and influence. Weill Cornell Medicine sits in the 91st percentile for impact and the 88th for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 93 of 106 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Reach is the softest pillar. At the 52nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,182 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 United Kingdom) carry about 88% 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 Toronto returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 8.1). 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.

582
h-index of the joint research base
2.7M
citations to co-authored work
3.52
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
20,564
co-authored works, 2021-2025
61
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.

Influence88th pctReach52nd pctDiversity57th pctSustained59th pctImpact91st pctInternational54th pctBrokerage24th pct

Weill Cornell Medicine is strongest on impact (91st percentile), influence (88th) and sustained (59th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 93 of 106 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Reach (52nd 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 Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight88th pct+19.4
Impact18% weight91st pct+16.4
Sustained18% weight59th pct+10.6
Reach16% weight52nd pct+8.3
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight54th pct+5.4

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#1000Immunology & Microbiolโ€ฆ82Medicine113Biochem. & Mol. Biology131Health Professions153Neuroscience229Nursing389
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Weill Cornell Medicine's strongest connected fields are Immunology & Microbiology #82, Medicine #113, Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology #131. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,182 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 #395 for connected research
67/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University13,018
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University1,026
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ711
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ643
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University617
Life Sciences
World #760 for connected research
36/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University4,398
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University385
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Icahn School of Medicโ€ฆ242
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University232
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University208
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1182 for connected research
1/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University785
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University61
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University45
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ39
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University30
Social Sciences
World #1124 for connected research
6/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University1,180
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University90
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University66
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University60
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pennsylโ€ฆ47
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 yieldCornell UniversityHarvard UniversityUniversity of Penn
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Toronto returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 8.1): a consortium waiting to happen. Cornell University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 3.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University15,527 3.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University1,236 7.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University825 6.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University779 4.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco735 6.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai710 5.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pennsylvania672 7.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University656 6.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University604 6.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan568 6.9Standard
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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 40,316
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 1,652
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 1,633
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 1,184
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 1,050
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 750
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 685
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 608

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University 15,527
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 1,236
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University 825
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University 779
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, San Francisco 735
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai 710
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pennsylvania 672
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University 656

The network spans 76 countries and 938 universities, but the top two carry about 88% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Asia-Pacific white-space (3 of the region's 34 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.

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 Immunology & Microbiology.

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

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 Immunology & Microbiology.

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

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 Immunology & Microbiology.

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

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 Immunology & Microbiology.

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.

Hospital for Special Surgery
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyMedicine

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‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ University of Eastern FinlandFinland
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Sichuan UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universidad de GranadaSpain
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Leipzig UniversityGermany
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช University of MรผnsterGermany
Cancer Genomics and DiagnosticsCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentCAR-T cell therapy researchCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

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 Asia-Pacific 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 Toronto tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the reach 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 Weill Cornell Medicine.

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.