Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Xuzhou Medical College (China), 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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
19,682
co-authored works, 5 years
658
partner universities
58
partner countries
357
sustained deep ties
2.15
collaboration impact (FWCI)
86%
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 #435 in the world for connected research, with Agricultural & Biological Sciences #440, Neuroscience #490 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Xuzhou Medical College sits in the 67th percentile for influence and the 32nd for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 111 of 129 partners (86%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 7th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,139 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (China and United States) carry about 95% 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-29 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Nanjing Medical University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 2.0). 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.

265
h-index of the joint research base
1.6M
citations to co-authored work
2.15
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
19,682
co-authored works, 2021-2025
16
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.

Influence67th pctReach10th pctDiversity7th pctSustained20th pctImpact32nd pctInternational10th pctBrokerage14th pct

Xuzhou Medical College is strongest on influence (67th percentile), impact (32nd) and sustained (20th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 111 of 129 partners (86%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (7th 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.

InflImpaSustEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight67th pct+14.7
Impact18% weight32nd pct+5.8
Sustained18% weight20th pct+3.6
Reach16% weight10th pct+1.6
Diversity16% weight7th pct+1.1
International10% weight10th pct+1.0

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#1000Immunology & Microbiol…435Agricultural & Biologi…440Neuroscience490Dentistry518Pharmacology, Toxicolo…528Biochem. & Mol. Biology548
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Xuzhou Medical College's strongest connected fields are Immunology & Microbiology #435, Agricultural & Biological Sciences #440, Neuroscience #490. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #1,139 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 #276 for connected research
77/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…1,873
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University944
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jiangsu University706
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…677
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University674
Life Sciences
World #283 for connected research
76/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…1,310
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…802
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University793
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University785
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…781
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1084 for connected research
9/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of M…212
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…202
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University195
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…180
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…169
Social Sciences
World #1139 for connected research
5/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…56
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University43
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical Unive…39
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University39
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University37
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 yieldNanjing Medical UnSoochow UniversitySichuan University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Nanjing Medical University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 2.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Sichuan University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 0.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical University2,697 2.0Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University1,304 1.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University1,089 1.2Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jiangsu University1,087 2.0Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University950 1.4Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College920 1.3Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University893 1.6Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nantong University890 1.8Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University854 1.1Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University833 1.3Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 34,879
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 2,529
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 415
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 397
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 340
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 265
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 187
πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ͺ Sweden 159

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical University 2,697
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Soochow University 1,304
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University 1,089
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jiangsu University 1,087
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University 950
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College 920
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University 893
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nantong University 890

The network spans 58 countries and 658 universities, but the top two carry about 95% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (0 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.

πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-8 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-110 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

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.

Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical CollegeSecond People’s Hospital of Huai’anSecond Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical CollegeXuzhou No.1 People's Hospital
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.

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Howard UniversityUnited States
National Sun Yat-sen UniversityTW
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Engineering UniversityChina
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of MemphisUnited States
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Miami UniversityUnited States
Cancer-related molecular mechanisms researchMicroRNA in disease regulationFerroptosis and cancer prognosisRNA modifications and cancerCircular RNAs in diseasesCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers

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 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 Nanjing Medical University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity 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 Xuzhou Medical College.

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.