Global Health Product Awards
Review process
Every accepted entry follows the same sequence: independent assessment, resolution of material questions and a documented decision. The product category determines the expertise and evidence required.
Eligibility and completeness
The awards team checks the applicant's authority, product identity, category, market information and entry materials. The team requests any missing information and confirms the appropriate category. If the product is ineligible, you receive the reason. Your account records both submission and acceptance dates.
Reviewer assignment
Two reviewers are selected for the product and its evidence. Together, their expertise must cover the technical field, relevant methods and use context. Each declares potential conflicts before receiving access. A relevant conflict is resolved by an authorised person who is not affected by it.
Independent assessment
The reviewers examine the same version of the entry materials and score each criterion with reasons and evidence references. They submit independently and cannot see one another's scores beforehand. Reviewers can see the product identity needed to assess the evidence. Their initial scores remain independent.
Questions and additional material
Questions are sent through the awards team and recorded in the entry. The request identifies what is needed, why and by when. Revised files are retained as new versions. Reviewers receive the new material with an explanation of the changes; previous versions remain in the review history.
Moderation and third review
A chair checks the evidence, criteria and reasons. A third assessment is required for a difference of more than 15 points, a score from either reviewer between 75 and 84 inclusive, disagreement on a mandatory threshold, or a material technical issue.
The final decision explains how material differences were resolved. It is not selected by taking the highest score. Changes to an assessment have a recorded reason.
Decision and feedback
The applicant receives the result, its reasons and criterion-level feedback. Ineligible entries and entry materials closed as incomplete receive a separate explanation. An unsuccessful completed assessment is not made public.
For an award, the recipient checks the product identity and proposed public information before the record and free award materials are released. No purchase is part of this process.
After the decision
Applicants may appeal a material factual or procedural error within 30 calendar days. Recipients must report relevant product changes, and anyone may report a concern about a public award. These routes preserve a record of the original decision and subsequent action.