The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2473
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-11T18:01:52.142010Z
status: published
lens: g_space
sector: health
headline: Measurement of Early Gastric Cancer Size Using a Computer Vision-Assisted Virtual Ruler: A Prospective Clinical Study
dek: Background: Accurate measurement of early gastric cancer (EGC) size is important for clinical management. We evaluated a computer vision-assisted virtual ruler (VR) for measuring lesion size during endoscopy.
Methods: This prospective clinical trial included 78 patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) from January to December 2024. The maximum diameter of the post-ESD specimen, measured with a physical ruler, was used as the reference. VR measurements obtained during ESD and preoperative vis…
gain_title: In a prospective study of 78 patients, a computer vision virtual ruler measured early gastric cancer lesions with a mean absolute error of 1.00 mm versus 3.00 mm for visual estimation.
problem_title: (none)
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: In a prospective study of 78 patients, a computer vision virtual ruler measured early gastric cancer lesions with a mean absolute error of 1.00 mm versus 3.00 mm for visual estimation.
gain_evidence: MAE was lower with VR than with visual estimation (1.00 vs. 3.00 mm, P=0.001)
problem_reading: (none)
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: A prospective study of 78 patients who had endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in 2024 found that a computer vision-assisted virtual ruler measured lesions more accurately than doctors' visual estimates. Mean absolute error was 1.00 mm with the ruler against 3.00 mm for visual estimation.

The reference was the maximum diameter of the removed specimen, measured with a physical ruler. Visual estimation underestimated lesion size overall and in both the high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma groups, while the virtual ruler's readings did not differ significantly from the reference.

Accurate size matters for clinical management of early gastric cancer. The gap was most apparent for flat lesions and adenocarcinoma, though the reported results come from one prospective study with 78 patients.
limitation: 
tag: Evidence-backed gain
key_points: The study enrolled 78 patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection between January and December 2024. | Mean absolute error was 1.00 mm with the virtual ruler versus 3.00 mm with visual estimation (P=0.001). | Percentage relative error was 3.28% with the ruler versus 7.89% with visual estimation (P=0.001). | Bland-Altman limits of agreement were -4.23 to 4.19 mm for the ruler versus -3.85 to 9.49 mm for visual estimates. | The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.979 for the ruler versus 0.909 for visual estimation (P<0.001). | The difference was most apparent for flat lesions and adenocarcinoma.
rundown: Researchers compared two ways of sizing lesions: virtual ruler measurements taken during endoscopic submucosal dissection and preoperative visual estimates. Both were checked against the maximum diameter of the post-resection specimen, measured with a physical ruler.

Agreement statistics favored the virtual ruler. Its Bland-Altman limits of agreement spanned -4.23 to 4.19 mm, while visual estimates spanned -3.85 to 9.49 mm, a much wider upper range that reflects underestimation of lesion size.

The team also compared lesion size between patients with high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma. Visual estimation underestimated size in both groups, and the virtual ruler's advantage was largest for flat lesions and adenocarcinoma.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy &amp; Percutaneous Techniques | https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000001526 | 2026-11-11
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

89f466aacc83c9b1bc54900688e123a5913b858cd39a8529f6b1cc9b56126572

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000