OwnChart CAIHL draft report

OwnChart: CAIHL reassessment

September 8, 2026. Published AI-assisted draft.

OwnChart is a patient-controlled record workflow with local-first storage and optional AI. Patient choice of records and analysis supports agency, but beta status, security assumptions, and distinctions between patient and caregiver authority remain important. The maintainer’s relationship with HugoScore is disclosed. This is not an independent review.

Scope and agency posture

Self-hosted OwnChart record-and-AI research workspace, including owner/caregiver records. The operator controls hosting and model keys. The synthetic demo is a separate surface. The maintainer's relationship with Hugo remains a disclosed conflict, not independent review.

Posture: Strongly agency-expanding, with beta/security caveats.

Axis: 94/100, retained provisionally. No numerical recalibration was performed.

Sources and documented findings

• The product page describes immutable sources, user corrections, cited answers, and scoped permission before external model calls.

• The privacy policy distinguishes self-hosted records from developer-operated demo logging and external AI provider terms.

• The shipped-versus-roadmap document identifies export UI and owner/caregiver roles as shipped. It now describes Beta 1.2 Pictal export, while some calendar integration and live connector verification remain held.

Patient authority

Inference from the documented workflow: The documented ability to change questions, preserve originals, add corrections, and select models supports substantial user direction. In a caregiver-operated instance, operator authority may not equal the patient's authority, so delegation matters.

Critical capacity

Editorial assessment: Citations, original evidence, and review of uncertain extractions directly support questioning an interpretation. These are specific mechanisms, not an inference from self-hosting alone.

Informed control

Editorial assessment: Audit records and explicit model data boundaries improve informed use. The concrete shipped/held distinction makes limitations inspectable. Security and consent enforcement remain untested by this review.

Assessment and limits

The design supports the existing strong posture, qualified by implementation maturity and operating burden. Source evidence does not establish a reproducible advantage of exactly three points over OpenKP.

Confidence: Medium for documented controls, low for independent implementation assurance.

Remaining uncertainty: End-to-end correction fidelity, consent enforcement, delegated-patient safeguards, safe self-hosting, and unfinished connectors.

Published documentation is evidence of stated conditions, not proof of actual implementation. Unknowns did not receive automatic negative points. Funding, sponsorship, and public code do not determine agency by themselves.

Review provenance

• Reviewer/model: OpenAI Codex / GPT-6.
• Method: Focused public-source reassessment using CAIHL: patient authority, critical capacity, and informed control. Existing evidence plus one focused primary-source pass and at most one targeted follow-up. No live product testing. Numerical scores remain provisional editorial placements, not a new calculation.
• Human review: Hugo Campos authorized publication of these AI-assisted draft reassessments on September 8, 2026. This does not claim comprehensive human verification of every finding.
• Earlier review: 2026-06-08. Historical assessment. Earlier claims are not automatically reverified by this publication.

Disclosures

Maintainer is a friend, colleague, and collaborator of HugoScore's maintainer. OwnChart's maintainer, Nick Dawson, is a friend, professional colleague, and collaborator and advisor of Hugo Campos, and both projects come from the same patient-directed AI advocacy community. This profile should not be read as independent review, and third-party review is invited.