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
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

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

For a journal about reaching health to the hardest places, equity is not a side commitment — it is the whole reason we exist. Here is how it shapes what we cover, who we serve, and whose voices we centre.

Corporate responsibilityOur aims and scope
Equity in our workBy which we judge field gear
01Criterion
Field-first
The constraints of under-served settings kept central, not marginal
Coverage
02Criterion
Plain
Written for practitioners on the ground, not only researchers reading from afar
Language
03Criterion
Open
Open-access so cost never prices out the people who most need the knowledge
Access
04Criterion
Local
Field contributors welcomed so the journal reflects the settings it serves
Voice
Standards of the desk
ArticleField Series
Why equity is central

A journal built around the overlooked

Most health technology is designed, tested and reviewed for well-resourced environments. The clinic with reliable power, the laboratory down the corridor, the supply chain that simply works. The settings this journal serves are the ones that fall outside those assumptions — and so do the people in them.

That is precisely why equity sits at the centre of our work rather than at its edge. We do not cover low-resource settings as a special interest; they are the whole interest. Every desk, every review and every guide is oriented toward the places and communities that commercial and academic attention most often passes over.

End of section
How equity shapes the journal

Four ways it shows up in the work

Equity is only meaningful if it changes what we actually do. It shapes our coverage, our language, our access model and whose voices we centre.

  1. 01
    Coverage

    Reviewing for the field, not the bench

    We judge equipment on field resilience in under-resourced conditions — the test that matters where care is hardest to deliver.

    Our scope
  2. 02
    Language

    Plain words, real readers

    We write for programme managers, logisticians and clinicians on the ground, not only for a specialist academic audience.

    Read more
  3. 03
    Access

    Open by default

    Open-access publishing keeps cost from standing between the people who need field knowledge and the knowledge itself.

    Access policy
  4. 04
    Voice

    Field contributors welcomed

    We actively seek contributors working in the settings we cover, so the journal reflects rather than merely describes them.

    Contribute
  5. 05
    Priority

    The under-served come first

    Where review is scarce and resources thin, we direct our attention — because that is where independence matters most.

    Read more
  6. 06
    Honesty

    Naming our own limits

    We are honest that we cannot represent every setting perfectly, and we treat that limit as something to keep narrowing.

Plate II
Fig. — field plate
Figure. Engraved reference plate — evaluating equipment on field resilience, not lab-bench ideals.
Whose constraints we centre

Designing reviews for the hardest case

When we evaluate a piece of equipment, we ask how it behaves in the hardest realistic case, not the easiest: ambient heat, intermittent power, dust, humidity, limited maintenance and untrained handling. Equipment that only works in ideal conditions fails the people we serve.

This is an equity choice as much as a methodological one. By centring the constraints of the most under-resourced settings, we make our reviews most useful exactly where good information is scarcest. The full method is set out in our peer-review policy.

Read our review method
Inclusion in practice

How we widen the table

Inclusion is a set of practices, not a statement. Four of them shape how the journal works.

  1. 01Step

    Seek field voices

    We actively invite contributors from the low-resource settings we cover, valuing direct experience over formal credentials.

  2. 02Step

    Remove cost barriers

    Open-access publishing ensures the knowledge reaches practitioners regardless of institutional budget.

  3. 03Step

    Write to be used

    We keep language plain and practical so the guidance is usable by the people doing the work, not only by experts.

  4. 04Step

    Listen and correct

    We treat reader feedback from the field as a source of correction, recorded openly when it changes our conclusions.

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

Where we still fall short

Equity work that only celebrates itself is not credible. We are honest that a small editorial desk cannot perfectly represent every region, language or setting it writes about. There are voices we have not yet reached and constraints we do not yet understand well enough.

We treat those gaps as work to be done rather than facts to be hidden. The most direct way to help close them is to contribute: if you work in a setting we are not yet serving well, our contributor guidelines and editorial desk are open to you.

Contribute from the field
Correspondence

Queries to the desk

05 entries on file
Q1.Why does a health-equipment journal have a DEI commitment at all?

Because our entire remit is reaching health to under-served settings. Equity is not an add-on here; it is the orienting purpose of every desk, as our aims and scope explain.

Q2.How does equity change what you review?

We judge equipment on how it performs in the hardest realistic field conditions, and we prioritise areas where independent review is scarce. That keeps our work most useful where good information is rarest.

Q3.Can people from the field contribute?

Yes, and we actively seek them. Field experience is valued above formal credentials. See our contributor guidelines.

Q4.How does open access relate to equity?

Open-access publishing — set out in our open-access policy — keeps cost from excluding the practitioners who most need field knowledge.

Q5.Do you claim to represent every setting perfectly?

No. We are honest that we fall short of full representation and treat the gaps as work to be done. Contributing through the editorial desk is the best way to help us close them.

From the editorial desk

Equity is the point, not the postscript

See how this commitment translates into responsibility and method — or help us serve a setting better by contributing from the field.

Read our corporate responsibility