Corrections Policy
DRAFT, not yet in force. Modeled on standard editorial corrections practice. Last drafted: 2026-10-23.
Forward for Health aims to be accurate, sourced and transparent about uncertainty. When we get something wrong, we fix it in public.
1. How to report a problem
Use Report on any entry, assessment or comment, or email [email protected]. You do not need an account. Tell us:
- what is wrong, such as a misstated number, a wrong source, an outdated estimate, an undisclosed conflict or a privacy concern;
- where the correct information can be found, if you know.
2. What happens next
| Report type | Priority | Target first response |
|---|---|---|
| Privacy, such as patient-identifiable information, or security | Highest. The content is restricted while we review | 1 business day |
| Factual or source errors in a published entry or assessment | Normal | 5 business days |
| Disputes over a feasibility assessment | Normal | 5 business days |
| Style or clarity | Low | Next scheduled review |
These are targets for a small, founder-run team, not guarantees. If we are behind, the site will say so.
3. Types of change
- Correction: a factual error is fixed. A dated correction note on the entry says what changed and why.
- Update: new evidence replaces an older estimate, such as a newer burden figure. The reference year is updated, and the change shows in the history.
- Clarification: the wording was misleading but the facts were right. A clarification note is added.
- Withdrawal: the entry no longer meets our standards for scope, sourcing or safety. It is marked withdrawn, with the reason, and is not silently deleted.
- Minor edits: typos and formatting that do not change meaning. These are recorded in the history, with no public note.
Every published entry keeps a visible revision history.
4. Disputed assessments
If a feasibility assessment is credibly disputed, it is labelled Disputed and moved out of the assessed ranking into a separate section until the dispute is resolved. Its history stays visible. A disagreement among clinicians or researchers is a reason for review, not for removal.
5. Out-of-date content
Evidence is due for review 180 days after it was last checked, and feasibility assessments after 90 days. A "review due" label is a prompt to refresh, not a finding that something is wrong. Overdue feasibility assessments are left out of the default assessed ranking until they are reaffirmed.
6. Appeals
If you disagree with how we handled your report or your content, email [email protected] with "Appeal" in the subject line. Someone who did not make the original decision reviews the appeal where possible. While the founder is the only reviewer, the founder reconsiders the decision and records the outcome.