World University Rankings 2018 by subject: clinical, pre-clinical and health methodology

November 8, 2017

The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2018 clinical, pre-clinical and health subject ranking includes a range of narrower subject areas.

The list of subjects used to create this ranking is:

  • Medicine & Dentistry
  • Other Health

Different weights and measures

The subject tables employ the same range of 13 performance indicators used in the overall World University Rankings 2018, brought together with scores provided under five categories.

However, the overall methodology is carefully recalibrated for each subject, with the weightings changed to suit the individual fields.

The weightings for the clinical, pre-clinical and health ranking are:

  • Teaching: the learning environment

    27.5 per cent
  • Research: volume, income and reputation

    27.5 per cent
  • Citations: research influence

    35 per cent
  • International outlook: staff, students and research
    
7.5 per cent
  • Industry income: innovation

    2.5 per cent

Criteria

No institution can be included in the overall World University Rankings unless it has published a minimum of 1,000 research papers over the five years that we examine.

For the 11 subject tables, the thresholds are set differently. For clinical, pre-clinical and health, the threshold drops to 500 papers published in this discipline over the last five years. And we expect an institution to have at least 5 per cent of its staff working in this discipline in order to include it in the subject table.

登录 或者 注册 以便阅读全文。

请先注册再进行下一步

获得一个月的无限制地在线阅读网站内容。只需注册并完成您的职业简介.

注册是免费的,而且非常简单。一旦成功注册,您可以每个月免费阅读3篇文章。:

  • 获得编辑推荐文章
  • 率先获得泰晤士高等教育世界大学排名相关的新闻
  • 获得职位推荐、筛选工作和保存工作搜索结果
  • 参与读者讨论和公布评论
注册

Reader's comments (2)

I wish to know the procedure and how can institutions participate in THE 2019 ranking ?
If you wish to take part in the rankings, you should contact our Rankings team (send an email to: profilerankings@timeshighereducation.com). They can guide you through the process.

欢迎反馈

Log in or register to post comments

评论最多

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October