And now you have to tell her she does not qualify.

The screening potassium came back at 3.3 mEq/L. The exclusion threshold is 3.5. The investigator has reviewed the result and confirmed: screen failure. There is no protocol provision for a repeat draw. The determination is final.

This is the moment that separates a skilled coordinator from one who merely follows checklists. Because what happens next — how you document this screen failure, how you communicate it to this woman, how you report it to the sponsor, and how you use this data point to improve your screening pipeline — matters enormously. It matters to the participant who invested her time and hope. It matters to the integrity of your study records. And it matters to every future participant whose screening experience will be shaped by what you learn from this one.

Screen failures are not failures of the participant. They are outcomes of a process designed to protect people. But they require the same rigor in documentation, the same professionalism in communication, and the same analytical attention as any other study procedure. In my experience, sites that handle screen failures carelessly tend to handle other procedures carelessly too. The discipline you bring to this process reveals the discipline you bring to everything.

And now you have to tell her she does not qualify.

The screening potassium came back at 3.3 mEq/L. The exclusion threshold is 3.5. The investigator has reviewed the result and confirmed: screen failure. There is no protocol provision for a repeat draw. The determination is final.

This is the moment that separates a skilled coordinator from one who merely follows checklists. Because what happens next — how you document this screen failure, how you communicate it to this woman, how you report it to the sponsor, and how you use this data point to improve your screening pipeline — matters enormously. It matters to the participant who invested her time and hope. It matters to the integrity of your study records. And it matters to every future participant whose screening experience will be shaped by what you learn from this one.

Screen failures are not failures of the participant. They are outcomes of a process designed to protect people. But they require the same rigor in documentation, the same professionalism in communication, and the same analytical attention as any other study procedure. In my experience, sites that handle screen failures carelessly tend to handle other procedures carelessly too. The discipline you bring to this process reveals the discipline you bring to everything.