We describe the design of a critiquing system, HyperCritic, that relies on automated medical records for its data input. The purpose of the system is to advise general practitioners who are treating patients who have hypertension. HyperCritic has access to the data stored in a primary-care information system that supports a fully automated medical record. Hyper-Critic relies on data in the automated medical record to critique the management of hypertensive patients, avoiding a consultation-style interaction with the user. The first step in the critiquing process involves the interpretation of the medical record in an attempt to discover the physician's actions and decisions. After detecting the relevant events in the medical record, HyperCritic views the task of critiquing as the assignment of critiquing statements to these patient-specific events. Critiquing statements are defined as recommendations involving one or more suggestions for possible modifications in the actions of the physician. The core of the model underlying HyperCritic is that the process of generating the critiquing statements is viewed as the application of a limited set of abstract critiquing tasks. We distinguish four categories of critiquing tasks: preparation tasks, selection tasks, monitoring tasks, and responding tasks. The execution of these critiquing tasks requires specific medical factual knowledge. This factual knowledge is separated from the critiquing tasks and is stored in a medical fact base. The principal advantage demonstrated by HyperCritic is the adaption of a domain-independent critiquing structure. We show how this domain-independent critiquing structure can be used to facilitate knowledge acquisition and maintenance of the system.