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
Corporate Responsibility

Corporate Responsibility

About the Masthead·Institutional·Responsibility·Peer-reviewed in spirit · Educational

What it means for an independent, educational health desk to act responsibly — to readers, to contributors, and to the field communities our work is meant to serve.

Our governancePublication ethics
Our commitments in briefBy which we judge field gear
01Criterion
0
Commercial influence — no advertiser shapes coverage or conclusions
Independence
02Criterion
Open
Open-access by default, so field knowledge can travel freely
Access
03Criterion
Honest
No claimed credentials, metrics or indexing we have not earned
Integrity
04Criterion
Field-first
The constraints of low-resource settings kept central, not marginal
Equity
Standards of the desk
ArticleField Series
What responsibility means here

A small desk with real obligations

The International Health Journal is an educational publication, not a large corporation — but the duties of responsibility are no smaller for that. People read our reviews and spend scarce health budgets on the strength of them. Communities live with the consequences of equipment chosen partly on our reading of the evidence. That gives us obligations we take seriously.

Responsibility, for us, is not a marketing posture. It is a set of concrete, enforceable commitments — to keep our independence real, our access open, our claims honest, and the communities we write about genuinely served rather than merely referenced. The pages below set out how each commitment is held.

End of section
Our four obligations

Where responsibility actually bites

We hold ourselves to four obligations. Each is documented elsewhere on the site so it can be checked, not just claimed.

  1. 01
    To readers

    Independent, honest review

    No payment shapes our coverage; no credential is claimed that we have not earned. Readers get the evidence, plainly, with our uncertainty stated.

    Read the ethics
  2. 02
    To contributors

    Fair, clear contribution terms

    Contributors know how their work is reviewed, credited and corrected, and how conflicts of interest are declared.

    Read the guidelines
  3. 03
    To the field

    Open access to knowledge

    We publish open-access by default so the people who most need field knowledge are never the ones priced out of it.

    Read the policy
  4. 04
    To the record

    Open correction

    Errors are recorded openly and promptly, keeping the public record trustworthy rather than tidy.

    Read the policy
  5. 05
    To equity

    Centring overlooked settings

    We keep the constraints of the most under-served settings central to what we cover and how we judge it.

    Read more
  6. 06
    To accountability

    Transparent governance

    Decisions are made through a documented governance process, and independence is protected structurally.

    Read more
Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
Independence as responsibility

Refusing influence is the first duty

The most consequential thing a review desk can do responsibly is refuse to be bought. We accept no payment to feature a product and carry no advertising that shapes coverage. A favourable review here cannot be purchased, and an unfavourable one cannot be suppressed by a vendor.

This is not merely a promise; it is enforced through our governance and publication ethics, with conflicts of interest declared and recorded. Independence is the foundation every other obligation rests on.

How independence is protected
Responsibility in practice

How we keep the commitments real

Commitments are only as good as the routines that enforce them. Four practices keep ours honest.

  1. 01Step

    Declare interests

    Every reader declares any stake in a subject and recuses themselves from judging it, on the record.

  2. 02Step

    Publish openly

    Reviews are open-access by default, so cost never stands between field teams and the evidence.

  3. 03Step

    State uncertainty

    We say plainly where the evidence is thin, rather than projecting a confidence we do not have.

  4. 04Step

    Correct in public

    Errors are logged openly and quickly, with readers able to flag suspected mistakes to the desk.

Method of review
Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
Beyond the page

Responsible to the communities we write about

It is easy to write about low-resource settings and easy to forget the people in them. We try not to. We centre the constraints of under-served communities in what we choose to review, and we write so that practitioners working in those settings — not just researchers reading from elsewhere — can actually use the result.

Our commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion is the formal expression of this. It is also the reason we welcome field contributors: the people closest to the problem should help shape the journal that claims to serve them.

Our equity commitment
Correspondence

Queries to the desk

05 entries on file
Q1.Do you have a foundation or parent organisation?

We are an independent educational desk and describe ourselves honestly as such, without claiming an institutional backing we do not have. Our governance page sets out how the journal is actually run.

Q2.How is 'no commercial influence' enforced, not just stated?

Through declared and recorded conflicts of interest, structural separation of review roles, and our publication ethics. A favourable review cannot be bought and an unfavourable one cannot be suppressed.

Q3.Why is open access part of responsibility?

Because the people who most need field knowledge are often the least able to pay for it. Open-access publishing — set out in our open-access policy — keeps cost from standing in the way.

Q4.How can I hold you accountable?

Read our published standards and flag anything that falls short to the editorial desk. Corrections are recorded openly under our corrections and retractions policy.

Q5.How does responsibility shape what you cover?

We prioritise the settings and equipment most often overlooked by commercial review — the places where an independent reading matters most. See our aims and scope.

From the editorial desk

Responsibility you can check, not just read

Every commitment here is documented and enforceable. Start with our governance and ethics, then judge us against them.

Read our governance