Ambient scribe
nVoq Voice
nVoq Voice gives clinicians control over dictation and ambient documentation. The capture guide includes a permission attestation and configurable retention, which qualify broader no-storage claims. Refusing recording is narrower than refusing all AI-assisted documentation.
Published September 8, 2026 as an AI-assisted draft. The public report separates documented facts, agency judgments and unresolved questions.
Summary judgment · 28 out of 100 toward patient-directed
Clinician-operated dictation and ambient documentation. Ambient recording refusal is narrower than refusal of all AI-assisted documentation.
Mixed, institution-directed
nVoq Voice gives clinicians control over dictation and ambient documentation. The capture guide includes a permission attestation and configurable retention, which qualify broader no-storage claims. Refusing recording is narrower than refusing all AI-assisted documentation.
Patient agency
How this tool changes agency
Clinician review can catch errors. The public materials do not give patients equivalent source access or a direct correction interface.
Actual consent, patient access, deletion propagation and non-recording alternatives remain deployment-specific
Patient agency assessment
Who sets and changes the goal?
Institutions choose configuration and clinicians control outputs. A documented recording refusal mechanism matters, but does not establish patient control of subsequent dictation or final wording.
What can the patient understand, question, or do?
Clinician review can catch errors. The public materials do not give patients equivalent source access or a direct correction interface.
Can the patient evaluate the conditions of use?
Retained product data must be distinguished from any zero-retention model-provider arrangement. Current guide evidence supports retaining this qualification.
Text findings
Conditions of use
Published controls and their limits
Retained product data must be distinguished from any zero-retention model-provider arrangement. Current guide evidence supports retaining this qualification.
What remains unknown?
Not tested or not established
Actual consent, patient access, deletion propagation and non-recording alternatives remain deployment-specific
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://support.nvoq.com/docs/voice-help-windows-conversation-capture
- https://www.nvoq.com/nvoq-faqs/
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
Actual consent, patient access, deletion propagation and non-recording alternatives remain deployment-specific 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 · Moderate for current official workflow documentation (AI-assisted draft)