Ranking Web of World Hospitals

Ranking Web of World Hospitals 1 The "Webometrics Ranking of World Hospitals" is an initiative of the Cybermetrics Lab, a research group belonging to the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) the largest public research body in Spain. CSIC is among the first basic research organizations in Europe. The CSIC consisted in 2006 of 126 centers and institutes distributed throughout Spain. CSIC is attached to the Ministry of Education and Science and its main objective is to promote scientific research as to improve the progress of the scientific and technological level of the country which will contribute to increase the welfare of the citizens. CSIC also plays an important role in the formation of new researchers and technicians in the different aspects of the science and the technology. The organization collaborates with other institutions of the Spanish R&D system (Hospitals, autonomous goverments, other public and private research organisms) and with social, economic, national or foreign agents to which it contributes with its research capacity and human and material resources in the development of research projects or under the form of consultancy and scientific and technical support. CSIC was founded in 1939 from a previous body, the Junta para la Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Científicas created in 1907 under the leadership of the Spanish Nobel Prize Prof. Ramón y Cajal. The Instituto de Estudios Documentales sobre Ciencia y Tecnología (IEDCYT), was founded in 1954 to strengthen the scientific information of high quality in all fields of knowledge. Cybermetrics Lab, part of the IEDCYT - CSIC, is devoted to the quantitative analysis of the Internet and Web contents specially those related to the processes of generation and scholarly communication of scientific knowledge. This is a new emerging discipline that has been called Cybermetrics (our team developed and publishes the free electronic journal Cybermetrics since 1997) or Webometrics. The Cybermetrics Lab using quantitative methods has designed and applied indicators that allow us to measure the scientific activity on the Web. The cybermetric indicators are useful to evaluate science and technology and they are the perfect complement to the results obtained with bibliometric methods in scientometric studies. The specific areas of research include:         Development of Web indicators to be applied on the areas of the Spanish, European, Latinamerican and World R&D Quantitative studies about the scientific communication through electronic journals and repositories, and the impact of the Open Access initiatives. Development of indicators about resources in the Society of Information Indicators and social networks visualization on the Web with friendly, dynamic and interactive graphic interfaces Design and evaluation of documental analysis techniques of Web resources Gender studies applied to the scholar activity on the Web Development of applied cybermetrics techniques based on the positioning on search engines of Web domains Analysis of the information usage through Web data mining of log files 1 Disponível em: < http://hospitals.webometrics.info/about_rank.html> 1 Objectives of the Webometrics Ranking of World's Hospitals The original aim of the Ranking was to promote Web publication, not to rank institutions. Supporting Open Access initiatives, electronic access to scientific publications and to other academic material are our primary targets. As other rankings focused only on a few relevant aspects, specially research results, web indicators based ranking reflects better the whole picture, as many other activities of professors and researchers are showed by their web presence. The Web covers not only only formal (e-journals, repositories) but also informal scholarly communication. Web publication is cheaper, maintaining the high standards of quality of peer review processes. It could also reach much larger potential audiences, offering access to scientific knowledge to researchers and institutions located in developing countries and also to third parties (economic, industrial, political or cultural stakeholders) in their own community. The Webometrics ranking has a larger coverage than other similar rankings. The ranking is not only focused on research results but also in other indicators which may reflect better the global quality of the scholar and research institutions worldwide. We intend to motivate both institutions and scholars to have a web presence that reflect accurately their activities. If the web performance of an institution is below the expected position according to their academic excellence, hospital authorities should reconsider their web policy, promoting substantial increases of the volume and quality of their electronic publications. Coverage of the Webometrics Ranking of World Hospitals This table summarize the actual coverage of the Ranking, in terms of number of countries and institutions around the world. 2 Design and Weighting of Indicators The unit for analysis is the institutional domain, so only hospitals with an independent web domain are considered. If an institution has more than one main domain, two or more entries are used with the different addresses. The first Web indicator, Web Impact Factor (WIF), was based on link analysis that combines the number of external inlinks and the number of pages of the website, a ratio of 1:1 between visibility and size. This ratio is used for the ranking, adding two new indicators to the size component: Number of documents, measured from the number of rich files in a web domain, and number of publications being collected by Google Scholar database. Four indicators were obtained from the quantitative results provided by the main search engines as follows: Size (S). Number of pages recovered from four engines: Google, Yahoo, Live Search and Exalead. Visibility (V). The total number of unique external links received (inlinks) by a site can be only confidently obtained from Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead. Rich Files (R). After evaluation of their relevance to academic and publication activities and considering the volume of the different file formats, the following were selected: Adobe Acrobat (.pdf), Microsoft Excel (.xls), Microsoft Word (.doc) and Microsoft Powerpoint (.ppt). These data were extracted using Google. Scholar (Sc). Google Scholar provides the number of papers and citations for each academic domain. These results from the Scholar database represent papers, reports and other academic items. The four ranks were combined according to a formula where each one has a different weight but maintaining the ratio 1:1: The inclusion of the total number of pages is based on the recognition of a new global market for academic information, so the web is the adequate platform for the internationalization of the institutions. A strong and detailed web presence providing exact descriptions of the structure and activities of the hospital can attract new students and medical doctors worldwide. The number of external inlinks received by a domain is a measure that represents visibility and impact of the published material, and although there is a great diversity of motivations for linking, a significant fraction works in a similar way as bibliographic citation. The success of self-archiving and other repositories related initiatives can be roughly represented from rich file and Scholar data. The huge numbers involved with the pdf and doc formats means that not only administrative reports and bureaucratic forms are involved. Excel and Powerpoint files are clearly related to academic activities. 3 Methodology PRESENTATION The Webometrics Ranking of World Hospitals formally and explicitly adheres to the Berlin Principles of Higher Education Institutions. The ultimate aim is the continuous improvement and refinement of the methodologies according to a set of agreed principles of good practices. 0) Background of the project. The “World Hospitals' ranking on the Web” is an initiative of the Cybermetrics Lab, a research group of the Centro de Información y Documentación (CINDOC), part of the National Research Council (CSIC), the largest public research body in Spain. Cybermetrics Lab is devoted to the quantitative analysis of the Internet and Web contents specially those related to the processes of generation and scholarly communication of scientific knowledge. This is a new emerging discipline that has been called Cybermetrics (our team developed and publishes the free electronic journal Cybermetrics since 1997) or Webometrics. With these rankings we intend to provide extra motivation to researchers worldwide for publishing more and better scientific content on the Web, making it available to colleagues and people wherever they are located. The "Webometrics Ranking of World Hospitals" is launched in a "Beta" phase, and it is intended that once it reaches its definitive version it will be be updated every 6 months (data collected in January and July and published one month later). The Web indicators used are based and correlated with traditional scientometric and bibliometric indicators and the goal of the project is to convince academic and political communities of the importance of the web publication not only for dissemination of the academic knowledge but for measuring scientific activities, performance and impact too. A) Purposes and Goals of Rankings 1. Assessment of higher education (processes, and outputs) in the Web. The Web indicators and we are already publishing comparative analysis with similar initiatives. But the current objective of the Webometrics Ranking is to promote Web publication by Hospitals, evaluating the commitment to the electronic distribution of these organizations and to fight a very concerning academic digital divide which is evident even among world Hospitals from developed countries. However, even when we do not intend to assess hospital performance solely on the basis of their web output, Webometrics Ranking is measuring a wider range of activities than the current generation of bibliometric indicators that focuses only in the activities of scientific elite. 2. Ranking purpose and target groups. Webometrics Ranking is measuring the volume, visibility and impact of the web pages published by Hospitals, with special emphasis in the scientific output (referred papers, conference contributions, pre-prints, monographs, thesis, reports, …) but also taking into account other materials (courseware, seminars or workshops documentation, digital libraries, databases, multimedia, personal pages, …) and the general information on the institution, their departments, research groups or supporting services and people working or attending courses. 4 There is a direct target group for the Ranking which are the hospital authorities. If the web performance of an institution is below the expected position according to their academic excellence, they should reconsider their web policy, promoting substantial increases in the volume and quality of their electronic publications. Hospital members are indirect target groups as we expect that in a near future the web information could be as important as other bibliometric and scientometric indicators for the evaluation of the scientific performance of scholars and their research groups. 3. Diversity of institutions: Missions and goals of the institutions. Quality measures for research-oriented institutions, for example, are quite different from those that are appropriate for institutions that provide broad access to underserved communities. Institutions that are being ranked and the experts that inform the ranking process should be consulted often. 4. Information sources and interpretation of the data provided. Access to the Web information is done mainly through search engines. These intermediaries are free, universal, and very powerful even when considering their shortcomings (coverage limitations and biases, lack of transparency, commercial secrets and strategies, irregular behaviour). Search engines are key for measuring visibility and impact of hospitals’ websites. There are a limited number of sources that can be useful for webometric purposes: 7 general search engines (Google*, Yahoo Search*, Live (MSN) Search*, Exalead*, Ask (Teoma), Gigablast and Alexa) and 2 specialised scientific databases (Google Scholar* and Live Academic). All of them have very large (huge) independent databases, but due to the availability of their data collection procedures (APIs), only those marked with asterisk are used in compiling the Webometrics Ranking. 5. Linguistic, cultural, economic, and historical contexts. The project intends to have true global coverage, not narrowing the analysis to a few hundreds of institutions (world-class Hospitals) but including as many organizations as possible. The only requirement in our international rankings is having an autonomous web presence with an independent web domain. This approach allows a larger number of institutions to monitor their current ranking and the evolution of this position after adopting specific policies and initiatives. Hospitals in developing countries have the opportunity to know precisely the indicators' threshold that marks the limit of the elite. Current identified biases of the Webometrics Ranking includes the traditional linguistic one (more than half of the internet users are English-speaking people), and a new disciplinary one (technology instead of biomedicine is at the moment the hot topic) Since in most cases the infrastructure (web space) and the connectivity to the Internet already exits , the economic factor is not considered a major limitation (at least for the 1.000 Top Hospitals). B) Design and Weighting of Indicators 6. Methodology used to create the rankings. The unit for analysis is the institutional domain, so only that Hospitals with an independent web domain are considered. If an institution has more than one main domain, two or more entries are used with the different addresses. About 5-10% of the institutions have no independent web presence, most of them located in developing countries. Names and addresses were collected from both national and international sources including among others: Hospitals Worldwide Allianz worldwide care medical provider finder CISMEF, Catalogue et Index des Sites Médicaux Francophones US Hospitals www.hospitalsworldwide.com www.allianzworldwidecare.com www.cismef.org www.u-s-hospitals.com Hospital activity is multi-dimensional and this is reflected in its web presence. So the best way to build the ranking is combining a group of indicators that measures these different aspects. Almind & Ingwersen proposed the first Web indicator, Web Impact Factor (WIF), based on link analysis that combines the number of external inlinks and the number of pages 5 of the website, a ratio of 1:1 between visibility and size. This ratio is used for the ranking but adding two new indicators to the size component: Number of documents, measured from the number of rich files in a web domain, and number of publications being collected by Google Scholar database. As it has been already commented, the four indicators were obtained from the quantitative results provided by the main search engines as follows: Size (S). Number of pages recovered from four engines: Google, Yahoo, Live Search and Exalead. For each engine, results are log-normalised to 1 for the highest value. Then for each domain, maximum and minimum results are excluded and every institution is assigned a rank according to the combined sum. Visibility (V). The total number of unique external links received (inlinks) by a site can be only confidently obtained from Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead. For each engine, results are log-normalised to 1 for the highest value and then combined to generate the rank. Rich Files (R). After evaluation of their relevance to academic and publication activities and considering the volume of the different file formats, the following were selected: Adobe Acrobat (.pdf), Microsoft Excel (.xls), Microsoft Word (.doc) and Microsoft Powerpoint (.ppt). These data were extracted using Google and merging the results for each filetype after lognormalising in the same way as described before. Scholar (Sc). Google Scholar provides the number of papers and citations for each academic domain. These results from the Scholar database represent papers, reports and other academic items. The four ranks were combined according to a formula where each one has a different weight: Webometrics Rank 4*RankV+2*RankS+1*RankR+1*RankSc (position)= 7. Relevance and validity of the indicators. The choice of the indicators was done according to several criteria (see note), some of them trying to catch quality and academic and institutional strengths but others intending to promote web publication and Open Access initiatives. The inclusion of the total number of pages is based on the recognition of a new global market for academic information, so the web is the adequate platform for the internationalization of the institutions. A strong and detailed web presence providing exact descriptions of the structure and activities of the university can attract new students and scholars worldwide . The number of external inlinks received by a domain is a measure that represents visibility and impact of the published material, and although there is a great diversity of motivations for linking, a significant fraction works in a similar way as bibliographic citation. The success of self-archiving and other repositories related initiatives can be roughly represented from rich file and Scholar data. The huge numbers involved with the pdf and doc formats means that not only administrative reports and bureaucratic forms are involved. Excel and Powerpoint files are clearly related to academic activities. 8. Measure outcomes in preference to inputs whenever possible. Data on inputs are relevant as they reflect the general condition of a given establishment and are more frequently available. Measures of outcomes provide a more accurate assessment of the standing and/or quality of a given institution or program. We expect to offer a better balance in the future, but current edition intend to call the attention to incomplete strategies, inadequate policies and bad practices in web publication before attempting a more complete scenario. 9. Weighting the different indicators: Current and future evolution. The current rules for ranking indicators including the described weighting model has been tested and published in scientific papers. More research is still done on this topic, but the final aim is to develop a model that includes additional quantitative data, especially bibliometric and scientometric indicators. C) Collection and Processing of Data 6 10. Ethical standards. We identified some relevant biases in the search engines data including under-representation of some countries and languages. As the behaviour is different for each engine, a good practice consists of combining results from several sources. Any other mistake or error is unintentional and it should not affect the credibility of the ranking. Please contact us if you think the ranking is not objective and impartial in any way. 11. Audited and verifiable data. The only source for the data of the Webometrics Ranking is a small set of globally available, free access search engines. All the results can be duplicated according to the describing methodologies taking into account the explosive growth of the web contents, their volatility and the irregular behaviour of the commercial engines. 12. Data collection. Data are collected during the same week, in two consecutive rounds for each strategy, being selected the higher value. Every website under common institutional domain is explored, but no attempt has been done to combine contents or links from different domains. 13. Quality of the ranking processes. After automatic collection of data, positions are checked manually and compared with previous editions. Some of the processes are duplicated and new expertise is added from a variety of sources. Pages that linked to the Webometrics Ranking are explored and comments from blogs and other fora are taken into account. Finally, our mailbox receives a lot of requests and suggestions that are acknowledged individually. 14. Organizational measures to enhance credibility. The ranking results and methodologies are discussed in scientific journals, and presented in international conferences. We expect international advisory or even supervisory bodies to take part in future developments of the ranking. D) Presentation of Ranking Results 15. Display of data and factors involved. The published tables show all the Web indicators used in a very synthetic and visual way. Rankings are provided not only from a central Top 1000 classification but also considering several regional rankings for comparative purposes. 16. Updating and error reducing. The listings are offered from asp dynamic pages build on several databases that can be corrected when errors or typos are detected. Coments welcomed Our group thanks the comments, suggestions and proposals than can be useful for improving this website. We try to maintain an objective position on the quantitative data provided but mistakes can occur. Please, take into account that merging, domain change or networks problems can affect the ranking of the institutions. Currently the members of our team are Isidro F. AGUILLO, José Luis ORTEGA, Mario FERNÁNDEZ (Webmaster) and Ana UTRILLA. For more information please contact: Isidro CINDOC Joaquín 28002 Madrid. SPAIN Notes: - Aguillo, I. F.; Granadino, B.; Ortega, J. L.; Prieto, J. A. (2006). Scientific research activity and communication measured with cybermetric indicators. Journal of the American Society for the Information Science and Technology, 57(10): 1296 - 1302. - Wouters, P.; Reddy, C. & Aguillo, I. F. (2006). On the visibility of information on the Web: an exploratory experimental approach. Research Evaluation, 15(2):107-115. F. Costa, Aguillo CSIC 22 7 - Ortega, J L; Aguillo, I.F.; Prieto, JA. (2006). Longitudinal Study of Contents and Elements in the Scientific Web environment. Journal of Information Science, 32(4):344-351. - Kretschmer, H. & Aguillo, I. F. (2005).New indicators for gender studies in Web networks. Information Processing & Management, 41 (6): 1481-1494. - Aguillo, I. F.; Granadino, B.; Ortega, J.L. & Prieto, J.A. (2005). What the Internet says about Science. The Scientist, 19(14):10, Jul. 18, 2005. - Kretschmer, H. & Aguillo, I. F. (2004). Visibility of collaboration on the Web. Scientometrics, 61(3): 405-426. - Cothey V, Aguillo IF & Arroyo N (2006). Operationalising “Websites”: lexically, semantically or topologically?. Cybermetrics, 10(1): Paper 4. http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/v10i1p4.html 8 Distribution by Continent CONTINENT USA & Canada Europe Asia Oceania Rest of America Arab World Africa Top 200 125 56 15 2 2 Top 500 313 131 42 8 4 2 Top 1000 623 253 92 18 9 3 2 Distribution by Country RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 COUNTRY United States of America Germany Canada Netherlands Sweden Taiwan Japan Switzerland France United Kingdom Austria Republic Of Korea Austria Israel Italy Top 200 115 17 10 7 7 6 5 5 5 3 2 2 2 2 1 Top 500 287 29 26 12 10 16 9 8 8 13 7 7 5 4 14 Top 1000 571 45 52 18 11 25 20 15 12 39 14 12 8 7 35 9 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Spain Czech Republic Norway Thailand Turkey Belgium Hong Kong Switzerland Argentina Iceland Estonia Finland China Singapore Brazil New Zealand Poland Russian Federation Denmark Iran (Islamic Republic of) United Arab Emirates Qatar India Croatia (local name: Hrvatska) Malaysia Slovenia South Africa 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13 11 4 9 6 6 2 2 1 1 1 5 8 6 5 4 4 3 3 3 1 1 5 2 2 2 1 10 43 44 45 46 47 Ireland Latvia Saudi Arabia Swaziland Uruguay 1 1 1 1 1 11 Ranking Web of World Hospital 2 POSITION WORLD RANK 1 HOSPITAL University of Michigan Health System University of Texas Medical Branch NYU Medical Center University of Kansas Medical Center University of Virginia Health System Johns Hopkins Medicine Vanderbilt Medical Center Massachusetts General Hospital University of Rochester Medical Center MD Anderson Cancer Center University of Miami Hospital & Clinic Texas Tech Health Sciences Center University California Davis Health System Columbia University Medical Center University of Maryland Medical Center University of Kentucky Academic Medical Center University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas COUNTRY SIZE VISIBILITY RICH FILES 8 SCHOLAR 6 5 15 2 3 4 5 2 8 13 11 14 2 6 4 7 23 10 5 6 7 8 3 21 19 27 27 12 22 19 1 12 16 35 14 40 21 4 9 10 11 9 28 14 25 23 31 11 15 22 39 51 42 12 25 36 10 46 13 54 4 50 99 14 50 34 36 44 15 10 26 76 86 16 65 41 14 28 17 12 56 43 31 2 Disponível em: . 12 18 Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center University of Arkansas Medical Center University of Connecticut Health Center University of Nebraska Medical Center Children's Hospital Boston Loma Linda University Adventist Health Sciences Center Taipei Veterans General Hospital Wright Patterson Medical Center Hospital for Sick Children Brigham and Women's Hospital Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston George Washington University Medical Center Cedars Sinai Medical Center Rush University Medical Center Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Universitatsklinikum Gießen und Marburg Partners Healthcare System University Clinic Heidelberg Universitatsklinikum Heidelberg 20 65 7 38 19 7 71 3 56 20 11 75 17 25 21 22 23 61 69 48 9 40 67 76 23 24 73 70 61 24 33 126 5 1 25 26 27 28 173 41 35 37 40 49 86 105 20 146 62 79 104 173 145 71 29 30 31 32 40 69 29 116 120 96 93 97 27 49 150 68 72 114 78 34 33 43 83 118 129 34 147 64 110 70 35 36 76 72 115 3 78 82 64 439 37 4 173 24 37 13 38 Centre Hopistalier Universitaire de Roue University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center University of Cincinnati Hospital Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover National Cancer Center Hospital Hospital Authority Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Chu de Lyon Hopitaux de Lyon Assistance Publique Hopitaux de Paris University of Mississippi Medical Center Institut Curie Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum Arizona State Hospital Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children Universitatsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf Landstinget Gavleborg University of Missouri Health Care 42 70 326 30 39 117 132 23 77 40 138 99 92 101 41 16 191 42 29 42 43 44 45 46 175 58 59 215 80 66 122 67 90 148 66 18 156 64 52 220 240 296 152 160 47 48 49 197 156 49 151 95 29 21 189 581 27 105 87 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 77 165 138 107 172 140 150 87 198 45 13 41 59 119 122 24 144 53 68 116 103 188 3 218 106 100 202 160 67 Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Hospital Inselspital Universitatsspital Bern Calgary Health Region Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center Chang Gung Memorial Hospital 185 136 177 114 170 141 139 197 181 149 67 260 33 56 37 14 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 Seattle Children's Hospital and Medical Center Institut Municipal d'Investigació Medica Hospital del Mar Royal Children's Hospital Sarasota Memorial Hospital Universitatsklinikums Munster Walter Reed Army Medical Center Scott and White Memorial Hospital Camh Centre for Addiction & Mental Health Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois Lausanne Boston Medical Center Norrbottens Lans Landsting City of Hope CA Duke University Health System Asklepios Klinikum Bad Abbach Universitatsklinikum Tubingen University Hospital Tubingen London Health Sciences Centre University of North Carolina Healthcare Landstinget i Uppsala Lan Fox Chase Cancer Center University of Pittsburgh Medical Center University of Wisconsin Health Landspitalinn National University Hospital Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven TU Kliinikum Tartu University Hospital Seoul National University Hospital Detroit Medical Center Landstinget I Östergötland Academisch Medisch Centrum 198 109 117 134 219 104 84 247 45 269 57 118 111 124 245 319 32 35 150 137 240 474 162 55 123 164 374 107 838 736 216 125 314 557 534 66 166 377 100 168 110 210 145 189 181 82 51 72 575 196 104 535 205 257 537 60 206 239 46 154 19 133 177 226 60 52 511 71 202 339 51 307 126 228 232 74 192 201 203 182 176 95 320 174 213 18 21 146 10 261 241 422 427 34 222 252 148 236 217 77 122 147 220 230 89 121 365 310 25 119 291 180 15 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 95 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 Institute of Cancer Research Royal Cancer Hospital Vancouver Coastal Health Erasmus Medisch Centrum Universitait Medisch Centrum Rotterdam Maine Medical Center Malteser Krankenhaus St Franziskus Hospital National Cancer Institute’S Center Allina Hospitals & Clinics Chung Ho Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Medical University Ohio State University Medical Center Universitair Medisch Centrum Utrecht Kyushu University Hospital Universitatsklinikum Medizinische Fakultat Der Martin Luther Universitat Halle Wittenberg Salud Universitaria Catolica Institut de Recherches Cliniques de Montreal Lifespan Health System Universitatsklinikum Freiburg Intermountain Healthcare California Pacific Medical Center Roswell Park Cancer Institute Medical University of South Carolina Stony Brook University Hospital and Health Sciences Center Capital Health, Edmonton Area Long Island Jewish Medical Center Hopitaux Universitaires de Geneve Dokkyo Medical University Hospital University Hospitals of Cleveland Stanford Hospital and Clinics 401 139 337 467 179 93 148 177 314 604 244 193 221 159 158 169 46 47 212 285 183 1,114 83 201 427 353 557 141 265 62 16 36 579 85 303 195 95 98 218 234 184 249 115 46 90 684 187 283 215 165 259 202 135 318 260 70 428 44 382 225 286 22 273 55 412 75 63 286 226 173 143 277 316 315 214 417 102 87 1,071 176 400 276 113 39 334 144 53 330 184 342 336 88 126 404 360 96 353 557 38 341 224 30 267 300 201 28 1,008 427 16 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 St. Jude Children's Research Hospital Vanderbilt Children's Hospital Banner Health Karolinska Institute & University Hospital Department Health & Human Services of Tasmania Royal Hobart Hospital Kyoto University Hospital Care Group Healthcare System Children's Hospital Denver Asan Medical Center Seoul Lifebridge Health Hadassah Medical Organization St. John Health System Warren, Michigan Changhua Christian Hospital Children's Healthcare of Atlanta Pediatric Hospital Rikshospitalet Radiumhosptalet Universitatsklinikum Magdeburg NIH Clinical Center Peacehealth New York Presbyterian Hospital Children's Mercy Hospital and Clinics Sutter Health Hospitals Universitair Medisch Centrum St. Radboud Fraser Health Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital Swedish Medical Center, Wa Vancouver Island Health Authority Providence Health System 62 20 744 919 216 684 198 174 269 264 244 349 684 127 919 63 439 557 52 59 684 919 604 183 350 200 91 272 147 153 361 279 540 212 287 339 278 241 75 417 137 104 344 375 15 223 801 141 286 210 441 94 47 32 186 354 160 469 125 157 364 134 324 280 89 148 494 119 857 138 365 26 297 332 234 30 717 239 296 158 31 53 1,263 604 132 512 26 179 245 146 919 117 424 309 250 227 467 96 56 161 572 243 453 157 36 39 289 1,643 17 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 Health Sciences Center Shreveport Advocate Health Care Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh Klinikum der Johannes Gutenberg Universitat Mainz Kennedy Krieger Institute Wiener Krankenanstaltenverbund Shriners Hospitals for Children Northwestern Memorial Hospital 193 516 73 97 736 416 183 274 276 522 319 120 300 258 233 130 999 321 384 269 274 324 452 209 371 396 919 77 188 66 349 627 261 Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein Albert Einstein Sociedade Beneficente Israelita Brasileira 68555159413 852 Hospital de Clinicas Unicamp 2,5391,1631,022303 910 Hospital Do Câncer a C Camargo Instituto Do Coração Do Hospital Das Clinicas St. 2,5071,2351,47084 911 912 2,4791,542 484 89 18 Top Latin America CONTINENT RANK 1 2 3 HOSPITAL Salud Universitaria Catolica Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein Albert Einstein Sociedade Beneficente Israelita Brasileira Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina Universidade de São Paulo Maternidad Clínica Alemana Hospital de Clínicas Dr. Manuel Quintela, Hospital Universitario Hospital de Clinicas Unicamp Hospital Do Câncer a C Camargo Instituto Do Coração Do Hospital Das Clinicas Fundación Favaloro Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre Fleury Medicina E Saúde Rede Sarah de Hospitais de Reabilitação Bermuda Hospitals Board Instituto de Medicina Tropical Pedro Kouri Hospital Luis Carlos Galan Sarmiento Clínica Las Condes Hospital Clinico de La Universidad de Chile COUNTRY WORLD RANK 101 160 261 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 286 501 845 852 910 911 1,053 1,057 1,114 1,186 1,284 1,324 1,774 1,883 1,995 19