Our History

The journal began with a frustration familiar to anyone who has delivered health under constraint: the gap between what equipment promises and what it does. A refrigerator rated for the tropics that quietly failed at the depot. A rapid test that worked in the briefing room and degraded by the time it reached the clinic. The evidence to choose well existed, but it was scattered, vendor-tinted and rarely written for the field.

What started as a private notebook of field observations grew into a conviction that this gap deserved a dedicated, independent review desk. The journal was founded to close it — to read the published evidence carefully, test it against field reality, and write the result plainly for the people who carry the load.

Today the journal is a settled, four-desk review operation with a documented method and an open governance structure. The editorial board describes how review is governed by role; the governance page explains how decisions are made and independence protected; and the peer-review policy sets out exactly how a piece reaches the page.

None of that means the journal is finished. The remit can still be refined, and any change will be made transparently and recorded here, just as every change before it has been. The work — reading the evidence, then reading the field — is the same work it always was. The best place to see where it stands now is in the articles and field guides themselves.