Subject Ranking 2015-2016: Clinical, pre-clinical and health methodology

October 14, 2015

The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2015-2016 clinical, pre-clinical and health subject ranking includes a wide range of narrower subject areas.

The full list of clinical, pre-clinical and health subjects used to create this ranking is:

  • Allergy
  • Anaesthesiology
  • Cardiovascular system and cardiology
  • Dentistry and oral surgery
  • Dermatology
  • Endocrinology and metabolism
  • Gastroenterology and hepatology
  • Geriatrics and gerontology
  • Health care sciences and services
  • Haematology
  • Infectious diseases
  • Legal medicine
  • Medical ethics
  • Medical informatics
  • Medical laboratory technology
  • Medicine, general and internal
  • Neurosciences and neurology
  • Nursing
  • Nutrition and dietetics
  • Obstetrics and gynaecology
  • Oncology
  • Ophthalmology
  • Orthopedics
  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Pathology
  • Paediatrics
  • Pharmacology and pharmacy
  • Psychiatry
  • Public, environmental and occupational health
  • Radiology, nuclear medicine and medical imaging
  • Rehabilitation
  • Respiratory system
  • Rheumatology
  • Sport sciences
  • Surgery
  • Toxicology
  • Transplantation
  • Tropical medicine
  • Urology and nephrology
  • Clinical, pre-clinical and health - other topics

Different weights and measures

The subject tables employ the same range of 13 performance indicators used in the overall overall World University Rankings, 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 200 research papers a year over the five years we examine.

But for the six subject tables, the threshold drops to 100 papers a year for subjects that generate a high volume of publications and 50 a year in subjects such as social sciences where the volume tends to be lower. Although we apply some editorial discretion, we generally expect an institution to have at least 10 per cent of its staff working in the relevant discipline in order to include it in the subject table.


View the full World University Rankings 2015-2016 methodology


Browse the 2015-2016 clinical, pre-clinical and health top 100 results

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Summer Receptionists

University Of Chichester

PhD fellow within Machine Learning for Personalized Healthcare

Norwegian University Of Science & Technology -ntnu

Lecturer in Finance

Maynooth University

Teaching Laboratory Assistant

University Of Bristol
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Canal houses, Amsterdam, Netherlands

All three of England’s for-profit universities owned in Netherlands

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Alexander Wedderburn

Former president of the British Psychological Society remembered

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham