Skip to main content
Start Project

Trust

How GHMAP handles trust and review

GHMAP organizes healthcare market-access information with source governance, professional review, privacy boundaries, network context, and clear limits on what the platform does and does not do.

Status

What this page is — and is not

Last updated
Questions
support@ghmap.io

This page describes how GHMAP governs sources, review, and network context. It is not a certification, an audit report, legal advice, or a guarantee of outcome. Market-access content requires professional review before business use, and GHMAP is not clinical decision support. GHMAP holds no SOC 2 or ISO/IEC 27001 certification; the governance described here is GHMAP's own, and has not been audited by a third party.

Trust pillars

Six principles that govern how GHMAP operates

Six principles govern how records enter the platform, how they are reviewed, and where the platform stops.

Pillar 01

Source Governance

Every data point carries a source, a type, and a review status. Nothing is published as fact without one.

  • All intelligence is tagged by source type: official regulator, government ministry, payer authority, HTA body, peer-reviewed literature, or professional review.
  • Source publication date is recorded. Outdated sources are flagged and replaced — not left to silently mislead.
  • The source hierarchy is strict: official regulator publications outrank secondary sources. AI-drafted content is never presented as source-verified.
  • Users can see the source status of any data point before relying on it for a business decision.

Pillar 02

Professional Review

No GHMAP record is marked as verified without review by a qualified professional in that domain.

  • Regulatory, reimbursement, and clinical intelligence requires review by a professional with relevant domain expertise before it reaches 'Reviewed' status.
  • Reviewers are identified and accountable. Anonymous review is not permitted for records entering verified status.
  • Review is scoped: a clinical reviewer validates clinical claims; a regulatory professional validates pathway information. One domain does not validate another.
  • Records in review are visible to workspace members but clearly marked as pending — never presented as final until review is complete.

Pillar 03

AI Governance

AI accelerates structuring and drafting. It never produces verified intelligence on its own.

  • AI-assisted content is always marked as a draft. It is never presented to users as source-verified intelligence.
  • AI drafts preserve source attribution. The model does not invent sources — it structures and formats from provided inputs.
  • AI-generated summaries are clearly labeled. Users know when they are reading a model output versus a professionally reviewed record.
  • AI recommendations in tools like the Regulatory GPS and Readiness Checker are directional — they do not replace professional regulatory or reimbursement advice.

Pillar 04

Privacy Posture

Public pages receive no personal or patient data. Workspace data stays within the workspace.

  • Public-facing tools (Regulatory GPS, Readiness Checker, Manufacturing Quotes) do not store personally identifiable information beyond what is necessary to respond to a request.
  • Workspace data — company records, product profiles, meeting notes, stakeholder relationships — is accessible only to members of that workspace.
  • No patient data, medical records, or clinical trial data is accepted through any GHMAP interface.
  • Data submitted through public tools is used to route and respond to the request. It is not shared, sold, or used for advertising.

Pillar 05

Network Review

Workspace participation is reviewed so relationships can be tied to role, context, and accountability.

  • Workspace access is reviewed — not open registration. GHMAP evaluates role, organisation, and context before granting access.
  • Profiles and relationships are treated as reviewed, contextual records, not anonymous directory entries.
  • Relationships in GHMAP are documented and scoped: the context of a relationship (product, country, project) is recorded alongside the relationship itself.
  • A reviewed network means introductions should start from role, context, and source status — not cold outreach to unknown parties.

Pillar 06

Boundaries

GHMAP is a market-access intelligence platform. It has clear boundaries that it does not cross.

  • GHMAP does not provide medical diagnosis, clinical treatment advice, or patient-specific recommendations.
  • GHMAP does not guarantee regulatory approval, reimbursement, market success, or investment return.
  • GHMAP does not provide legal advice. Market-access intelligence informs legal strategy — it does not replace a lawyer.
  • GHMAP does not provide personalised financial or investment advice. Market intelligence supports investment decisions — it is not a substitute for a licensed financial advisor.

Scope

What GHMAP does — and what it doesn't

The boundary is part of the product. Both lists below are written to be read before a team relies on anything GHMAP produces.

What GHMAP does

  • Structures country-level regulatory and reimbursement intelligence from official sources
  • Tags every data point with source type, publication date, and review status
  • Connects manufacturer, distributor, hospital, clinician, investor, and operator context inside reviewed workflows
  • Structures introductions around role, project, country, product, and source status — not cold outreach to unverified directories
  • Generates AI-assisted drafts that are clearly labeled and require professional review before use
  • Organizes directional market intelligence to support prioritisation and planning decisions
  • Maintains source governance standards across every record in the platform

What GHMAP does not do

  • Guarantee regulatory approval, reimbursement coverage, or market success in any country
  • Provide medical diagnosis, clinical treatment recommendations, or patient-specific advice
  • Provide legal advice or act as a substitute for qualified legal counsel
  • Provide investment advice or guarantee return on any market-access investment
  • Present AI-generated content as source-verified intelligence
  • Accept patient data, medical records, or confidential clinical trial data
  • Allow self-reported unverified profiles to participate in the network

Trust in practice

Why trust matters in healthcare market access

Healthcare market access decisions — which countries to enter, which distributors to partner with, which regulatory pathway to follow — carry significant financial and clinical consequences. A wrong assumption about a reimbursement pathway can push a launch back and force expensive rework late in the process. A distributor relationship built without verification can collapse at the critical commercial stage.

GHMAP exists because those decisions are routinely made on unverified information, cold introductions, and outdated intelligence. The review model helps teams separate market-access context that can be used from information that still needs verification.

Read the methodologySee coverage

Start with reviewed context

Put a governed record behind your next market decision

Begin with source status, review needs, and relationship context visible — before a market-access decision becomes expensive to correct.

Start a project

Professional review is required before business use.