Review Policy
CVC aims to make vendor reviews useful, credible, and fair. This page explains what is allowed, how anonymity works, and when content may be rejected, removed, or challenged.
Governance pages
Allowed reviews
Reviews should be based on genuine working experience with a vendor and should help future shortlist decisions by describing delivery, quality, responsiveness, value, innovation, collaboration, or similar factors.
Not allowed
Reviews must not include fabricated experience, undisclosed conflicts, patient information, confidential study data, harassment, or defamatory factual claims presented without basis.
Public reviewer identity may be hidden or limited, but the platform may still verify reviewer details privately before or after submission.
Reviews may be held pending review, approved, rejected, edited for formatting only, or removed where trust, policy, legal, or evidence issues arise.
Where enabled, vendors may be allowed to post labelled responses to approved reviews, but not to rewrite or erase the underlying review.
CVC may review complaints, evidence, and legal notices relating to published reviews and may remove or restrict visibility while an issue is assessed.
Short, vague, abusive, or unsupported submissions may be rejected where they do not meet platform quality or usefulness standards.
Public-source context and platform-reviewed content are treated as separate layers. Paid visibility or sponsorship does not convert into review weighting.
