Optimal - The Blog
January 27, 2026
Blood test reviews can either build clarity and trust, or they can create confusion and anxiety. In this article, I outline seven common mistakes clinicians make when reviewing blood work and explain how to avoid them by focusing on patterns, prioritization, and practical next steps.
Blood tests are only as useful as the conversations they support.
When clinicians interpret results well, patients feel understood and leave with direction. When clinicians interpret results poorly, even “good” labs can leave patients confused, anxious, or convinced that nothing can help.
Below are seven common mistakes clinicians make in blood test reviews, along with practical alternatives that improve clarity and outcomes. This is written for practitioners, but educated patients may find it helpful as well.
1) Treating Every Abnormal Value as a Problem
Not every out-of-range value deserves equal attention. Single values can shift due to timing, hydration, sleep, and other variables.
Better approach: Focus first on patterns across related markers and on the systems most likely to explain symptoms.
2) Over-Explaining or Reading the Lab Report Line-by-Line
Patients rarely benefit from hearing every number and reference range.
Why it backfires: It increases anxiety, reduces understanding, and makes the patient feel like the body is a collection of problems.
Better approach: Explain what matters most, in plain language, and stop when clarity is reached.
3) Failing to Prioritize
When everything is presented as equally important, nothing feels manageable.
Better approach: Identify a small number of priorities. A focused plan improves adherence and outcomes.
4) Chasing Individual Biomarkers Instead of Explaining Systems
Patients don’t experience biomarkers. They experience fatigue, brain fog, poor sleep, weight changes, and low resilience.
Better approach: Translate findings into system-level explanations that connect to lived experience.
5) Over-Pathologizing Adaptation
Many lab patterns reflect the body’s attempt to cope, not fail.
Why it matters: If patients hear “something is wrong with you,” they often become fearful and overwhelmed.
Better approach: Use language that normalizes adaptation and emphasizes recovery.
Example framing:
- Your body has been compensating.
- The goal is to shift from compensation to recovery.
6) Not Explaining Why You’re Skipping or Stopping
When clinicians move on without explanation, patients assume something important was ignored.
Better approach: Be explicit about why you are not going deeper.
Example framing:
We already have enough information to make good decisions. Going into every value won’t add clarity and may distract us from what matters most.
7) Ending Without Clear Next Steps
A blood test review should end with direction, not ambiguity.
Better approach: Close every review with:
- A brief summary of the key patterns
- A short list of actionable priorities
- A plan for follow-up and trend analysis
Why Better Blood Test Reviews Matter
When blood test reviews are structured, patients feel understood and engaged. Clinicians make better decisions when interpretation is organized around patterns and priorities, not a list of abnormalities.
Closing Thoughts
Blood tests are powerful when they are used to create understanding and direction. A clear, prioritized interpretation helps patients take meaningful action and helps clinicians track progress over time.
To see how the Functional Health Report supports a more structured and effective review process, explore Optimal DX.
Tag(s):
Assessment
