Patient-controlled health records AI
OwnChart
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.
Published September 8, 2026 as an AI-assisted draft. The public report separates documented facts, agency judgments and unresolved questions.
Summary judgment · 94 out of 100 toward patient-directed
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.
Strongly agency-expanding, with beta/security caveats
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 Hugo is disclosed, so this is not an independent review.
Patient agency
How this tool changes agency
Citations, original evidence, and review of uncertain extractions directly support questioning an interpretation. These are specific mechanisms, not an inference from self-hosting alone.
End-to-end correction fidelity, consent enforcement, delegated-patient safeguards, safe self-hosting, and unfinished connectors.
Patient agency assessment
Who sets and changes the goal?
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.
What can the patient understand, question, or do?
Citations, original evidence, and review of uncertain extractions directly support questioning an interpretation. These are specific mechanisms, not an inference from self-hosting alone.
Can the patient evaluate the conditions of use?
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.
Text findings
Conflict of interest
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.
Conditions of use
Published controls and their limits
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.
What remains unknown?
Not tested or not established
End-to-end correction fidelity, consent enforcement, delegated-patient safeguards, safe self-hosting, and unfinished connectors.
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
- https://www.ownchart.me/
- https://www.ownchart.me/privacy
- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nickpdawson/OwnChart/main/user-docs/SHIPPED_VS_ROADMAP.md
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
End-to-end correction fidelity, consent enforcement, delegated-patient safeguards, safe self-hosting, and unfinished connectors. 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 documented controls, low for independent implementation assurance (AI-assisted draft)