How to evaluate homeopathy software
A product-neutral checklist for testing workflow fit, practitioner control, data handling, repertory coverage, support and cost before committing.
Scope: EzHomeo publishes this material and is commercially interested in homeopathy software. The guide evaluates software workflow and safeguards; it does not establish that homeopathy is effective for any condition and is not medical advice.
Score evidence, not adjectives
“Intelligent,” “secure” and “accurate” are conclusions. Ask for the observable feature, policy, benchmark or contract behind each one. Mark an item verified only after you see it in the product or governing documentation; mark it unknown when a sales answer has no artifact behind it.
Use the WHO guidance for AI in health, the OWASP AI security and privacy guide and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework as question sources, not as evidence that a particular vendor has met those frameworks.
1. Workflow fit
- Can I complete a representative first consultation and follow-up?
- Does the workflow work on the devices and connection quality I actually have?
- Can I correct the transcript without restarting the case?
- Can I find an old case and understand what changed?
- Can I export or print the records my practice needs?
2. Practitioner control and AI limits
- Are AI-generated, user-added and user-modified inputs distinguishable?
- Can I reject, add, pin and reweight rubrics before repertorisation?
- Can I trace a suggestion to the source text or recording?
- Does the product avoid presenting a model output as a clinical instruction?
- Are known limitations and correction paths documented?
3. Repertory and reference coverage
- Which repertories and editions are named, not merely counted?
- Can I choose the repertory and inspect comparative results?
- Are licensing and availability terms clear?
- Can I verify a rubric against its source?
- How are database corrections and updates handled?
4. Privacy, security and governance
- Does the privacy policy name collected data, purposes and processors?
- Who is responsible for recording consent and patient notices?
- What access controls, retention rules and deletion process exist?
- Does the vendor avoid compliance claims it cannot document?
- What happens to recordings, transcripts and derived data after cancellation?
5. Commercial and support terms
- What is included in the displayed price, and what can be usage-limited?
- Is a lifetime plan defined in the terms, including support and future services?
- How quickly can support respond, and through which channels?
- Can the vendor show a current product demo rather than a mock-up?
- Are testimonials, partner logos and adoption figures independently confirmable?
Comparison worksheet
For each product, write verified, unknown or not applicable, then note the artifact you checked. Do not collapse the result into one score: a safety, privacy, governance or contractual blocker can be a veto even when other rows look strong.
| Criterion | Product A | Product B | Product C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Representative first consultation and follow-up | |||
| Correction, traceability and practitioner sign-off | |||
| AI limits and escalation path | |||
| Named repertories, editions and licensing | |||
| Consent, access, retention and deletion | |||
| Export, cancellation and data portability | |||
| Current demo, support and total cost |
Applying this checklist to EzHomeo
Start with the documented workflow and limits, then read the privacy policy, terms and displayed pricing. Verify the remaining items in a trial; do not award EzHomeo points merely because it published the checklist.