About / methodology
HugoScore is the applied review layer for Critical AI Health Literacy: a public way to ask who health AI serves, who controls it, and whether it expands a patient's practical ability to understand, question, decide, challenge, navigate, and act.
HugoScore is run by Hugo Campos, a patient advocate and co-author of the CAIHL framework with Liz Salmi. Hugo's advocacy has focused on patient access to health information, including the right of patients to access data generated by their own implanted and connected medical devices.
Health AI is often judged by accuracy, efficiency, adoption, or compliance. HugoScore adds a patient-agency lens: whether a tool gives people more visibility, choice, contestability, understanding, and practical power inside health care.
Methodology
Reviews are led by Hugo Campos using the CAIHL-derived HugoScore patient agency framework, with AI-assisted public-source research and human editorial review before publication. Evidence includes official product documentation, privacy and security materials, patient-facing notices, health-system explainers, peer-reviewed studies, credible independent reporting, and submitted corrections. The 0-100 number is an axis position, not an overall quality grade: 0 means institution-directed control and 100 means patient-directed choice and control, with placement shaped by service alignment, visibility, consent, contestability, action support, privacy, equity, safety boundaries, evidence quality, and disclosed unknowns. Profiles update when substantial new evidence appears, when readers submit supported corrections, or during scheduled evidence refreshes; each profile shows its last-reviewed date, review method, status, and confidence.
Hugo-led CAIHL review, supported by structured research drafts and human judgment before publication.
Official sources, policies, patient materials, implementation notes, studies, independent reporting, and reader-supplied evidence.
0 to 100 locates the tool on the institutional-to-patient-directed axis; it is not a safety, quality, or procurement score.
Profiles refresh when evidence changes, corrections are accepted, or a scheduled review pass is completed.