Patient care navigation and health copilot AI
My Doctor Friend
My Doctor Friend combines patient questions, records, and visit support. The current privacy notice distinguishes consumer and provider use, names Google processing, and describes derivative-data permissions and layered retention. The earlier unread-policy caveat is replaced by these conditions.
Published September 8, 2026 as an AI-assisted draft. The public report separates documented facts, agency judgments and unresolved questions.
Summary judgment · 82 out of 100 toward patient-directed
Patient and caregiver companion, with provider-mediated use and community sharing as distinct contexts. Preserve the August 9 baseline 82. This pass resolves the prior unread-privacy-notice gap.
Potentially agency-expanding
My Doctor Friend combines patient questions, records, and visit support. The current privacy notice distinguishes consumer and provider use, names Google processing, and describes derivative-data permissions and layered retention. The earlier unread-policy caveat is replaced by these conditions.
Patient agency
How this tool changes agency
The baseline's preparation and thought-partner rationale is plausible. Data correction rights now have a current source, but a right to request correction is not proof of editable generated summaries or reliable error resolution.
Current audio and Apple Health processing, backup rotation duration, training restrictions and summary correction remain unresolved. Pricing and App Store counts remain August evidence.
Patient agency assessment
Who sets and changes the goal?
Patient-selected conversation and preparation remain the main agency basis. Consolidation alone does not prove patient custody independent of the vendor. Caregiver control also needs to be distinguished from the authority of the person whose information is held.
What can the patient understand, question, or do?
The baseline's preparation and thought-partner rationale is plausible. Data correction rights now have a current source, but a right to request correction is not proof of editable generated summaries or reliable error resolution.
Can the patient evaluate the conditions of use?
The privacy gap is now narrowed substantially. Direct-use safeguards should not be described as universal HIPAA coverage, and no-sale language should not imply no derivative research use. Retention and community visibility deserve plain-language prominence.
Text findings
Conditions of use
Published controls and their limits
The privacy gap is now narrowed substantially. Direct-use safeguards should not be described as universal HIPAA coverage, and no-sale language should not imply no derivative research use. Retention and community visibility deserve plain-language prominence.
What remains unknown?
Not tested or not established
Current audio and Apple Health processing, backup rotation duration, training restrictions and summary correction remain unresolved. Pricing and App Store counts remain August evidence.
Who evaluated this?
AI-assisted public-source draft
Vendor statements describe published conditions, not independently verified behavior. No clinical, security, accessibility, or legal validation is claimed. Earlier evidence remains dated in the report and history.
Sources checked
Source-specific findings and retrieval limitations are recorded in the full report.
Review provenance
Criteria
CAIHL-derived HugoScore framework and September 7 qualitative review priorities. Draft v1.2 numerical anchors remain unadopted.
Reviewer
AI-assisted public-source reassessment prepared in OpenAI Codex.
AI / model
OpenAI Codex / GPT-6
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.
Review date
2026-09-08
Limitations
Current audio and Apple Health processing, backup rotation duration, training restrictions and summary correction remain unresolved. Pricing and App Store counts remain August evidence. No live product use, patient-data upload, account creation, code audit, clinical evaluation, or independent implementation validation.
Review 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.
AI-assisted draft · Medium for rendered policy, limited for product behavior (AI-assisted draft)