This is a sample. A real audit of a real practice, shown with identifying details removed.

The audit is the scorecard itself. The review is the thirty minutes we spend going through it together.

FAx

VISIBILITY
SCORECARD

Specimen II, a New York facial plastics practice
specimen-ii.example.com · July 28, 2026 · Tier 1 audit · Rubric v1.1
22
signals measured
Sample scorecard
More once we complete the manual review together.
Executive summary

Your review count leads your local market, yet your overall visibility, which sits in the room-for-improvement range. The biggest cost is what patients see once they look closer: a slow site, a blog untouched since 2019, and almost no traction in AI search. That combination is what this conversation is built to address.

What the audit found

Strengths

+You lead your market on review volumeReputation and proof

You hold about 240 Google reviews, ahead of the nearest local competitor at roughly 141. This is real social proof, and patients comparing practices are more likely to trust the one with the deepest review history.

+Your paid search reaches high-intent patientsPaid media

Non-brand Google Ads are running on rhinoplasty terms, so you appear when patients search for a specific procedure rather than your name. That reaches people actively deciding where to book.

+Ads land on procedure-specific pagesPaid media

Your ad clicks reach dedicated landing pages matched to the advertised procedure, not a generic homepage. That keeps a searching patient on the topic they clicked for.

+Core search-engine labels are in placeContent and discoverability

Your site declares both Physician and MedicalOrganization schema, the code labels that tell search engines what your business is. That foundation helps engines read your practice correctly.

Costliest gaps

Instagram engagement is near zero against a large followingSocial and community

With about 109,000 followers, recent posts draw single-digit to low-double-digit likes, well under a healthy rate. A patient checking your account sees a big number with little life, which reads as less active than it is.

Your blog stopped in 2019Content and discoverability

Your blog at /blog/ shows no posts newer than 2019. Patients and AI search both read a stale site as a less current practice, so you tend to lose comparison shoppers to practices that look actively maintained.

The site loads slowly on phonesWebsite and booking

Your mobile speed score is 30 out of 100. Most patients arrive on a phone, and a slow load means more of them leave before seeing your work, so you risk losing them before the first impression lands.

You are nearly absent from AI searchContent and discoverability

Across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity, your practice was named in about 8% of answers. As patients increasingly ask AI who to see, low presence means you are rarely in the shortlist those tools hand back.

No financing information appears on your siteWebsite and booking

No payment-plan or financing language is present on the homepage or booking flow. Patients weighing cost see no path forward and tend to hesitate or pick a practice that answers the affordability question upfront.

The path forward

Discuss the findings

Let's sit down and walk through what patients see when they compare you to the practices ranking above you. The review turns your market-leading reputation into visibility that actually converts.

Lazar preps before the call: instagram engagement is near zero against a large following, and your blog stopped in 2019, both mapped in advance, plus every item marked In your review, ready to walk through together.

Book your 30-minute review →

Lazar LaLone · lazar@fractionalaesthetics.com · (412) 944-5506

Methodology

The goal: a diagnostic read of what a patient, or a referring doctor, sees from the outside, working only from what is openly on display and never from the practice's own dashboards or private analytics. It intentionally does not prescribe fixes, because effective solutions need further conversation and analysis to get right.

Rubric
Aesthetic Practice Visibility Scorecard v1.1, 100-point composite
Two kinds of number
Scores of 0 to 3 are ours, applied from this rubric. Figures such as Google's PageSpeed result, your star rating, review counts and follower counts are third-party measurements we read and report, not numbers we assign
This audit
Tier 1, the complimentary read. Every one of the 34 signals is drawn from patient-facing data. Tier 2 adds paid-media spend analysis, and only when you choose to share your ad data.
Signals
22 measured from patient-facing data so far; the rest walked through together in your review
Review items
Excluded from both earned and maximum points; they never count against the practice, and we look at them together in your review
Generated
July 28, 2026
Category breakdown
IN YOUR REVIEW = these signals need a closer look than patient-facing data alone allows, so we walk through them together in your review. They are excluded from the score entirely and never count against the practice.
1Local Search Visibility
56%
Your Google Business Profile is claimed and posting within the last 30 days, which keeps it live. Categories are thin: after generic types are set aside, only two aesthetic-relevant categories remain, so you surface for fewer of the searches patients actually run. Several profile areas need a closer look together.
1.1 GBP Claim & Completeness 2 / 3
1.2 GBP Categories 1 / 3
1.3 Service Menu on GBP In your review
1.4 GBP Photo Volume & Recency In your review
1.5 GBP Posts Frequency 2 / 3
1.6 Local Pack Presence (Primary Terms) In your review
1.7 Q&A Section Activation In your review
2Website & Infrastructure
36%
Your site is where the most consultations leak. Mobile speed scored 30 out of 100, the clearest booking button links to Facebook rather than scheduling, and no financing language appears anywhere. Each one gives a phone-first patient a reason to leave before booking.
2.1 Mobile Speed Score 1 / 3
2.2 Above-the-Fold Booking CTA 1 / 3
2.3 Online Scheduling Integration 2 / 3
2.4 Branded Treatment Page Coverage In your review
2.5 Financing Surfacing 0 / 3
3Reputation, Trust & Innovation
78%
This is your strongest area. You lead your market on reviews and respond to recent ones, though the replies are short and templated. You are a board-certified facial plastic surgeon, but that credential is easy to miss on the site and no society memberships show, so a trust signal you have earned works less hard than it could.
3.1 Google Review Volume (Market-Relative) 3 / 3
3.2 Review Response Discipline 2 / 3
3.3 Before/After Gallery Depth & Consent In your review
3.4 Board Certification & Society Visibility 2 / 3
3.5 Patient Evidence Beyond Stars In your review
3.6 Innovation Leadership & First-Mover Evidence In your review
4Content & Discoverability (incl. AEO)
44%
Your schema labels are solid, but content is dated. The blog has not published since 2019, and you appear in only about 8% of AI search answers. Video exists yet carries no transcripts, so search engines cannot read it. Together, this makes you look less current to patients comparing practices.
4.1 Blog Recency & Topical Depth 0 / 3
4.2 Visibility in AI search 2 / 3
4.3 Schema Markup Completeness 2 / 3
4.4 Podcast/Video Content Indexing 1 / 3
5Paid Media Presence
56%
Paid media is a bright spot. Non-brand Google Ads reach patients searching by procedure and land on dedicated pages. Meta activity is limited to a single ad variant, so your paid reach on that channel is narrow. The Google side is doing the heavier lifting.
5.1 Meta Ad Activity & Creative Variety 1 / 3
5.2 Google Ads Presence (Competitive Terms) 2 / 3
5.3 Landing Page Alignment 2 / 3
6Social & Community
30%
You have a following of about 109,000, but engagement is near zero and content runs to two formats. Highlights exist without organization by patient journey. A large account that looks quiet can undercut the confidence your review lead builds elsewhere.
6.1 Instagram Posting Cadence In your review
6.2 Engagement Rate 0 / 3
6.3 Content Mix Diversity 1 / 3
6.4 Link-in-Bio Strategy 2 / 3
6.5 Story Highlights Organization 1 / 3
7Identity & Citation Consistency
34%
A dead former web address still shows on your live site through an old feed reference, one loose end that fragments your identity. Directory consistency and cross-channel presentation were not scorable from patient-facing data and are worth walking through together.
7.1 NAP Consistency Across Directories In your review
7.2 Aesthetic-Directory Presence In your review
7.3 One consistent identity online 1 / 3
7.4 Cross-Channel Brand Consistency In your review
Fractional Aesthetics

That is the whole read: 22 signals measured from what a patient can see. The rest we go through together.

Prepared for Specimen II, a New York facial plastics practice · July 28, 2026 · Rubric v1.1

Download this scorecard (PDF) ↓ All sixteen samples →

Want one for your practice?

Complimentary, no call required, and every scorecard is prepared and personally reviewed before it goes out. Leave your practice's website and yours is on its way.

Run my audit →