Specimen IV, a Chicago multi-location surgical group

What the audit found

Patients searching for a Chicago surgical group find you, then hit a mobile site that loads slowly and never machine-identifies you as a medical provider. Your visibility scored 46 out of 100, which leaves clear room for improvement. The biggest issue: your listings carry two different names, addresses, and phone numbers, so patients cannot confirm they have the right practice.

What is working

1. You already show up in AI search. When patients ask ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or Perplexity about Chicago procedures, your site was cited with a link in 47% of answers. That is genuine visibility where more patients now start their search.
2. Deep treatment page coverage. You have 50 plus dedicated procedure pages built out by location across your Chicago-area offices. Patients searching a specific treatment near a specific office are more likely to land on a page that matches.
3. Google categories are well set. Your Google Business Profile carries six relevant categories covering skin care, medical clinic, and surgery. This helps you surface for a wider range of patient searches on Google.
4. Verified double board certification. Your surgeon holds verified certification from two boards, shown on the About page and Instagram. This is the trust signal most patients look for before booking a surgical consultation.

Where consultations are going elsewhere

1. Two different practice identities are live. Your Google listing shows one name and address; your directory presence shows "Chicago Institute of Cosmetic & Plastic Surgery" at a different address and phone. Patients who cannot confirm they found the right practice tend to move on.
2. Mobile site loads very slowly. Your mobile speed score is 16 out of 100. Most patients search on their phones, and a page this slow means many leave before it finishes loading, so consultations go to faster competitors.
3. Search engines cannot tell you are a medical provider. Your site carries no code labels that identify you as a medical business or physician (scored 0 of 3). Search engines and AI answers read you as a generic website, so you are easier to overlook.
4. No patient proof beyond star counts. The homepage cites 90 plus five-star reviews but shows no written or video testimonials and nothing procedure-specific (scored 0 of 3). Patients comparing surgeons want real stories, and without them tend to pick a practice that shows them.
5. No clear way to book online. Booking depends on a phone call or a contact page (scored 1 of 4); no scheduler or prominent booking button was found. Patients ready to book who cannot do it in the moment often do not call back.

Area by area

Local presence and Google 78%

Your Google presence is your strongest area. The profile is claimed, hours and categories are set, and a recent post is live. What I could not see from public data: your photo volume, your service menu, and whether you appear in the map results on Google for your main procedures. We walk through those together in the review.

Website and booking 41%

You have deep, location-specific treatment pages, which is real strength. The trouble sits underneath: your mobile site scores 16 out of 100 for speed, and the booking button sits below the first screen with no scheduler. Patients on phones are more likely to leave before they reach it.

Reputation and proof 23%

Your surgeon's double board certification is verified and is a strong trust signal. But the homepage shows only star counts, no written or video patient stories, and no first-mover or innovation claims. Patients comparing surgeons want proof of results, and right now they cannot find it here.

Content and discoverability 50%

You are cited with a link in 47% of AI search answers, which is where more patients now begin. The gap: search engines carry no code labels identifying you as a medical provider, so you read as a generic site. Your video content also sits un-indexed and untranscribed.

Paid media 67%

Your Meta ads are active across several procedures with mixed formats, a solid base. Whether you show up on Google's paid results for competitive terms, and how well your ad landing pages match, are things I would review with your paste-in data.

Social and community 35%

You have an Instagram audience of roughly 2,200 and story highlights in place. Your bio link points only to the homepage rather than a booking or specials page, so high-intent visitors land somewhere general. Posting cadence and engagement need a closer look than public data allowed.

Identity and listings 26%

This is the costliest area. Your listings carry two different names, addresses, and phone numbers, which scored 0 of 3. Your RealSelf profile is active and well managed. Whether older brand names still linger elsewhere is something we confirm together in the review.

About this sample

This practice did not request the audit and has not seen it. Redaction bars mark where a practice name, address, phone number, or web address would appear. Every score and finding is what the audit produced.

Fractional Aesthetics is a growth strategy practice for aesthetic medical businesses. "Fractional" describes how the work is bought: senior strategic help on a part-time basis, without a full-time hire.

FAx is our audit: 34 scored items covering a practice's public presence, from Google and reviews to website, content, AI search, social, and listings. Every signal is publicly observable, so nothing is required from the practice to run one. The audit names what is working and what each gap costs. It does not prescribe fixes, because those need a conversation.