Browse the full Impact Rankings 2020 results

This ranking focuses on universities¡¯ research on the key conditions and diseases that have a disproportionate impact on health outcomes across the world, their support for healthcare professions, and the health of students and staff. It is not a general measure of a university¡¯s medical teaching and research.

Please view the methodology?for the Impact Rankings 2020 to find out how these data are used in the overall ranking.?

Metrics

Research on health and well-being (27%)

• Proportion of research papers that are viewed or downloaded (10%)
• Proportion of research papers that are cited in clinical guidance (10%)
• Number of publications (7%)

This focuses on research that is relevant to key diseases and conditions, measuring paper views, clinical citations and the volume of research produced.

The data are provided by Elsevier¡¯s Scopus dataset, based on a query of keywords associated with SDG 3 (good health and well-being). The data include all indexed publications between 2014 and 2018 and are normalised across the range using Z-scoring.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Proportion of health graduates (34.6%)

In order to understand how a university is supporting health professions we measure the proportion of graduates who receive a degree associated with a health-related profession out of the institution¡¯s total number of graduates.

The data relate to the number of graduates in the 2018 academic year. The degree does not necessarily give them the ability to practise directly; additional qualifications may be required.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

The data were provided directly by universities and normalised across the range using Z-scoring.

Collaborations and health services (38.4%)

• Smoke-free policy (8%)
• Collaborations with local or global health institutions to improve health and well-being outcomes (7%)
• Outreach programmes in the local community to improve health and well-being (7%)
• Access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services for students (7%)
• Free mental health support for students and staff (7%)
• Community access to university sports facilities (2.4%)

The data and evidence for these metrics were provided directly by universities. The evidence was evaluated and scored by ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ and is not normalised.

Evidence

When we ask about policies and initiatives, our metrics require universities to provide the evidence to support their claims. Evidence is evaluated against a set of criteria and decisions are cross validated where there is uncertainty. Evidence is not required to be exhaustive ¨C we are looking for examples that demonstrate best practice at the institutions concerned.

Timeframe

Unless otherwise stated, the data used refer to the closest academic year to January to December 2018.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Exclusions

Universities must teach undergraduates and be validated by a recognised accreditation body to be included in the ranking.

Data collection

Institutions provide and sign off their institutional data for use in the rankings. On the rare occasions when a particular data point is not provided, we enter a value of zero.