Every candidate in a trial receives a score from 0 to 100 that ranks them against the trial's criteria, so coordinators can decide who to work next without reading every chart. It ranks candidates; it is not a verdict on whether they are eligible.
Maria Gonzalez
4 mi·qualified
James Patterson
18 mi·outreached
Aisha Khan
32 mi·pending
Three candidates ranked by score - the ring shows the rank, not the status; distance and status sit beside it.
Score breakdown
Each criterion earns credit according to what the patient's record shows:
Confirmed - a criterion the record confirms counts in full.
Not answered - a criterion the record could not answer earns at most half credit, scaled by how often patients on this trial pass it. A sparse chart lowers the score without sinking it, and only a fully confirmed patient reaches 100.
Inclusion and exclusion, scored as two halves - the inclusion criteria and the exclusion criteria are each scored on their own and the two are averaged, so a long list of cleared exclusions never hides an open question about the diagnosis.
Decided against the patient - a required inclusion they fail, an exclusion they have, or an either-or set of inclusions where every option fails, makes the score 0.
Checked at the screening visit - criteria that can only be assessed in person are left out of the number and shown separately.
Each criterion also carries a weight that reflects its importance to the study:
Gating criteria - weighted 3×. An unanswered gating criterion costs the most.
Standard criteria - weighted 1×. The default for most inclusion and exclusion items.
Soft criteria - weighted 0.25×. Useful signals that move the rank only a little while they are unanswered.
Distance isn't part of the number
Proximity is a filter, not an ingredient: candidates outside the 50-mile radius aren't surfaced at all, but among those who are, distance doesn't move the score up or down. It's shown beside each patient so you can weigh travel yourself.
Each criterion earns
Confirmedfull credit
Not answeredhalf × pass rate
Decided againstscore is 0
Screening visitset aside, shown apart
Weighted by tier
Gating× 3
Standard× 1
Soft× 0.25
Inclusion half
weighted share of credit
avg
Exclusion half
weighted share of credit
Score0 - 100
A failed required inclusion or a triggered exclusion drops the score to 0. Only a fully confirmed patient reaches 100.
How the 0-100 score is built - each criterion earns credit by what the record shows, weighted by tier; the inclusion and exclusion halves are averaged. Distance is a filter, not part of the number.
Overriding verdicts
Open a candidate's detail panel and you'll see every criterion alongside the AI's verdict - met, not met, or unverified- and the supporting evidence from the chart. Click any verdict to override it. Overrides are recorded with your name and a timestamp, and the candidate's score updates immediately.
Interactive
Age 18 - 75 at enrollment
Patient.birthDate = 1962-04-15 (63 y.o.) ✓
Documented AFib in last 12 months
Condition I48.91 onset 2023-09-12, active
On stable rate-control therapy ≥ 4 weeks
MedicationRequest metoprolol 50mg BID, started 2024-01-04
eGFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m²
No recent CMP on file - needs lab draw at screening visit
Edit log
(0)
Click a verdict above - entries appear here.
Click any verdict chip to cycle: met → failed → unverified → screening visit. Each click is stamped to the audit log below.
Score vs. status
A patient's status - qualified, outreached, pending, or disqualified - is managed separately from the score. Status reflects where they are in your workflow; the score ranks who to work next.
Coordinator notes
Every candidate's panel has a Notes field for free-text remarks - a call summary, a follow-up reminder, anything the next person should see. Notes are shared with your whole team and saved with the patient, so they survive a refresh and appear for anyone who opens that candidate. You can delete notes you wrote yourself.