Skip to main content
The Journal of Global HealthInternational Health JournalEvidence for health where it's hardest to deliver
Vol.
XXIV
No.
04
Year
2026
Menu

Quick Links

ArticlesCommunity ForumContact
Language
Appearance
Editorial Desk

Contact the Editors

Global Health Equipment Review·Field Series·Evidence Desk·Peer-reviewed in spirit · Educational

Editorial enquiries, contributor proposals, corrections, and surveillance tips reach one desk. Tell us your lane in the first line and we route it to the right editor. We read every message from the practitioners we write for — and we answer with the same scrutiny we bring to a cold-box audit.

Send an enquiryHow we grade equipment
Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
How to reach us

One Desk, Clear Routing, Honest Triage

Use the enquiry form on this page and name your lane in the first line — editorial, contributor, correction, or general. That single word lets us route your message to the editor responsible before anyone reads the detail. We are an editorial review platform, not a vendor: we do not sell equipment, quote prices, or broker procurement. What we do is evaluate field-ready supplies for durability, portability, and suitability in low-resource and outbreak settings, and publish that judgment without endorsement.

Every message is logged and assigned to the editor covering the relevant pillar — Cold Chain, Field Diagnostics, Outbreak Response, or WASH Infrastructure — or to the corrections desk where it belongs. Any disclosure of commercial interest is recorded with the submission. We keep no public phone line or street address; the form is the fastest, fairest route to the right editor.

Start an enquiry
From the review desk

Which Enquiry Are You Making?

Name one of these in your first line and your message skips a routing hop. These are the four lanes the desk handles.

  1. 01

    Editorial enquiries

    Review requests, topic proposals, and questions about a published assessment across any of the four pillars. Tell us the equipment category and the setting it was used in, and point us to any field evidence.

    Our review method
  2. 02

    Contributor enquiries

    Section-editor, field-reviewer, and contributing-writer proposals from practitioners with deployment experience. Name your pillar and the field judgment you can bring.

    Careers and contribute
  3. 03

    Corrections

    Documented errors of fact, changed specifications, or field-failure evidence that contradicts a published grade. Reference the affected guide or review so we can verify against the record.

    Corrections and retractions
  4. 04

    General enquiries

    Anything that doesn't fit the lanes above — surveillance and supply-quality signals from the field, partnership questions, or a query about who we are and how we work.

    About the journal
Our field-equipment review method

What Happens After You Write

Our handling is deliberately careful where it matters and prompt where it should be. Here is the path your enquiry takes.

  1. 01Step

    Receipt and triage

    An editor confirms receipt and assigns your enquiry to the relevant pillar desk or to corrections. Correction and time-sensitive outbreak-response items are escalated ahead of the queue.

  2. 02Step

    Editorial assessment

    Review requests and tips are checked against field evidence — not catalog claims. We ask for deployment context, model or lot identifiers, and any conflict-of-interest disclosure before we proceed.

  3. 03Step

    Verification or correction

    Topic proposals enter the editorial calendar; corrections are verified against the published record and amended with a dated note. We never edit quietly — every substantive change is logged and flagged.

  4. 04Step

    Publication or reply

    Accepted work is published as a guide or review under the Global Health category, or summarised for the editorial briefing. Where a reply is owed, the responsible editor answers directly.

Method of review
Review criteriaBy which we judge field gear
01Criterion
4
Routing lanes: editorial, contributor, correction, general
02Criterion
4
Pillar desks: cold chain, diagnostics, outbreak, WASH
03Criterion
100%
Messages logged with any interest disclosed
04Criterion
0
Prices quoted, deals brokered, or vendors steered
Standards of the desk
ArticleField Series

Careful where it matters, prompt where it should be

Naming your lane in the first line is not bureaucracy — it is how a small desk gives each kind of message the handling it needs. A correction with documented evidence and an outbreak-response tip are escalated ahead of the queue, because a wrong verdict a program is acting on, or a supply-quality signal during an active response, cannot wait. A topic proposal enters the editorial calendar at a more deliberate pace. A general query is answered by whoever covers the area it touches.

Two things hold across every lane. First, any commercial interest you disclose is recorded with your message, so it travels with the evidence rather than being lost — the same firewall described in our publication-ethics statement. Second, we are an editorial review platform, not a vendor or a sourcing advisor: we do not sell equipment, quote prices, or broker procurement, and no message — however framed — buys a favourable verdict. What we offer is field-tested judgment, reasoned in the open under our editorial standards.

End of section
Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
Before you write

Point us at the right policy

Many enquiries are answered faster by the policy pages than by a reply. If you want to know how a verdict is reached, our editorial standards set out the durability, portability, and field-suitability rubric. If you want to know how an assessment is independently checked, our peer-review policy describes the review model, reviewer selection, and timelines. If you have found an error, our corrections-and-retractions policy explains exactly how a documented report becomes a dated correction on the record.

Contributors and reviewers should start with the contributor guidelines, which set out the field evidence we value, the rule against named-product endorsement, and the conflicts you must declare up front. Reading the relevant policy first means your message arrives with the context the desk needs to act on it — and often answers the question before you have to send it.

Read the editorial standards
Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
Stay in the loop

Subscribe to the Editorial Briefing

A measured digest for practitioners, researchers, and program teams: new equipment guides, review updates, correction notices, and surveillance signals across the four pillars. No promotions, no vendor placements — editorial only. Enter your work email below to subscribe; you can unsubscribe from any issue.

The briefing carries no commercial sponsorship and names no products we have not field-assessed. It is graded for the field, not the catalog.

Subscribe to the briefing
Correspondence

Queries to the desk

05 entries on file
Q1.Do you have a phone number or office address?

We keep no public phone line or street address. The enquiry form on this page is the fastest and fairest route to the right editor — it is logged, routed by lane, and records any commercial-interest disclosure with your message. For anything urgent, mark your subject accordingly and we escalate it.

Q2.Do you review specific products or recommend brands?

We publish field-tested editorial judgment on equipment categories and individual items where we have deployment evidence, but we make no commercial endorsements and accept no vendor payment. Assessments are framed as editorial opinion, citation-minded and disclosed.

Q3.I'm a procurement officer — can you advise on a purchase?

We are an editorial platform, not a sourcing advisor. We do not quote prices, broker deals, or steer buyers to a seller. Our guides and reviews are written so you can apply the criteria yourself: durability, portability, WHO PQS alignment where relevant, and suitability for your operating environment.

Q4.How do I submit a field-equipment tip or review request?

Use the enquiry form and name 'editorial' in your first line. Include the equipment category, the setting it was used in, any lot or model identifiers, and the failure or strength you observed. Field data — not marketing copy — is what moves a review forward.

Q5.How do I flag a correction?

Name 'correction' in your first line and reference the published guide or review. We verify against the record and, if confirmed, amend with a dated correction note. Substantive corrections are also carried in the editorial briefing.

From the editorial desk

Send an Editorial Enquiry

Review request, contributor proposal, correction, or general query — name your lane in the first line and the form routes it to the right editor. We answer every credible message from the field.

Open the enquiry form