Decision frameworks
Frameworks you can reuse with attribution
Published in full so that another team can apply them, adapt the weights, and reach a defensible conclusion of its own.
Written by Compare Healthcare API Editorial DeskReviewed by Technical ReviewLast reviewed Rubric v1.0
Short answer
What frameworks does this site publish?
Three. The seven-criteria evaluation framework defines the weighted rubric used for every score here and shows how to reweight it for a different buyer. The build-versus-buy framework compares owning a documentation layer against embedding a scribe API, including year-two ownership costs. The RFP question set turns those criteria into questions whose answers are artefacts rather than adjectives.
Cite as: Decision framework index, Compare Healthcare API, last reviewed 2026-09-01.
- RubricSeven-criteria evaluation frameworkThe weights, the reasoning behind each one, three worked reweightings for different buyers, and the scoring discipline that keeps it honest.
- ArchitectureBuild vs buyThree architectures, their year-two cost curves, and the question that actually settles it: who owns clinical safety when a note omits something.
- ProcurementRFP question setQuestions organised by criterion, written so a vague answer is visibly vague. Reusable with attribution.
Frequently asked questions
- Can we reuse these frameworks internally?
- Yes, with attribution to this site and a link. They are published to be adopted; the value of a shared rubric is that different teams' conclusions become comparable. Start with the rubric.
- What if we disagree with your weights?
- Then change them. The weighting encodes an assumption about the buyer, and ours is a software team embedding documentation. The vendor selector recomputes every score under your weights and exports a citable report. Open the selector.