The highest trust bar on the internet
Content without a credential is a liability
Condition and treatment pages need a named clinician's review, visible credentials, and dates. Google has been explicit that health content is judged on who stands behind it, and AI engines inherit that bias because they cite the sources Google already trusts. Content mills cannot fix this; your clinicians' names can.
Multi-location is where technical SEO earns its keep
Every location needs its own page, its own Google Business Profile, and consistent name, address and phone data everywhere. The common failure is one "locations" page trying to rank in nine suburbs, and nine profiles managed by nobody. This is unglamorous structure work with very measurable returns.
The symptom search moved
Patients increasingly describe symptoms to AI engines before they search anything. Those answers name provider types, sometimes providers, drawn from trusted directories and medical sources. You cannot buy your way in; you can be structurally easy to trust: schema, corroborating citations, and content the engines can quote safely. Our AEO Visibility Audit measures where you stand.
The stack we would buy, in order
| Step | Task | Price |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Technical SEO Audit, location structure and index health | $295 |
| 2 | SEO Content, clinician-reviewed condition pages | $395/mo |
| 3 | AI Citation Monitoring, watch how engines represent you | $49/mo |
What the first 90 days look like
Month one is the Technical SEO Audit plus a credential inventory: who on your clinical team can byline what. Month two ships the location-page system, one strong page per site with LocalBusiness and Physician schema, matched hours and phones, and embedded maps. Month three starts condition and treatment content under clinical review, and takes the first AI citation snapshot, because patients now ask engines what a symptom means and the engines answer with sources.
Governance that keeps compliance comfortable
Healthcare marketing dies in review queues when the process is vague. Ours is not: every piece names its clinical reviewer up front, cites primary sources, carries no outcome claims, and arrives as a tracked document your compliance team can annotate. The QA gate runs before your review, not instead of it, so what reaches compliance is already clean and the queue moves.
Questions healthcare teams ask us
How does Google treat medical content differently?
Health queries sit under Google's strictest quality standards, usually shorthanded as your-money-your-life. In practice that means credentialed bylines, cited sources and organizational trust signals decide rankings more than word count ever will.
Can you work inside our compliance process?
Yes, that is the default. Content ships as tracked drafts with named clinical reviewers and cited sources. Nothing publishes until both your compliance team and your named clinician have signed off.
Multi-location health system: where do we start?
Location pages and profile consistency first, because they fix the largest number of patient journeys at once. Condition content comes second, once every location resolves cleanly in search and maps.
One honest caveat: the timelines above describe when movement typically starts, not a guarantee. Search engines do not sign contracts, and results land quicker or slower than any plan. What we guarantee is the deliverable itself: scoped work, QA gated, revised up to three times until it matches the brief.
Structure first, always
The Technical SEO Audit maps your location and index reality before a dollar goes into content.