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 XII, a Portland injector-led studio
specimen-xii.example.com · July 28, 2026 · Tier 1 audit · Rubric v1.1
16
signals measured
Sample scorecard
More once we complete the manual review together.
Executive summary

Patients researching injectors in Portland find your AI search answers and treatment pages, but almost nothing that proves your results or reputation. Your visibility, which puts you in the room-for-improvement range. The proof gap is where consultations are quietly going elsewhere.

What the audit found

Strengths

+You show up in AI search answersContent and discoverability

Across 90 test answers, ChatGPT-style and Google AI tools named you 25 times and linked to your site 21 times. Patients asking AI who to see are already finding you, which is where more searches now start.

+Booking is easy to find on mobileWebsite and booking

Your booking button sits at the top of the mobile screen, so a patient ready to book does not have to hunt for it. This is where most of your traffic lands.

+Real pages for your flagship treatmentsWebsite and booking

You have dedicated pages for fillers, wrinkle relaxers, DiamondGlow, Sculptra, Sofwave, Kybella and more, so patients searching a specific treatment can land on a matching page rather than a competitor's.

+Named written testimonials on your siteReputation and proof

Eight written patient reviews with names sit on your site, giving a researching patient words to trust beyond a star rating. This is genuine social proof most nearby studios do not put on the page.

Costliest gaps

No before-and-after gallery on your siteReputation and proof

There is no results gallery on your homepage or navigation; results live only inside your Instagram feed. In aesthetics, patients decide on visible outcomes, so they tend to pick a studio whose results they can see on the page.

Reviews go unansweredReputation and proof

Your review response rate is 0 percent. A patient comparing you to a practice that replies to every review reads silence as a practice that is less engaged, and is more likely to book the one that answers.

No service menu on your Google listingLocal presence and Google

Your Google profile has no services section and no Q&A activity. A patient scanning the map results sees less than they do on competing listings, so you look thinner at the exact moment they are choosing who to call.

Two different phone numbers listed for youIdentity and listings

Your Google profile shows one phone number while directories show another. Mismatched contact details make search engines less confident about who you are, and a patient can reach a dead end trying to call.

Search engines only half-understand your siteContent and discoverability

Your site carries basic Organization code labels but nothing marking you as a medical or aesthetic business or naming your providers. Search engines and AI tools have to guess what you are, which weakens how confidently they present you.

The path forward

Discuss the findings

Let's sit down and walk through what the audit found and where it points. A short conversation turns this snapshot into a clear order of what to address first.

Lazar preps before the call: no before-and-after gallery on your site, and reviews go unanswered, 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
16 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
34%
Your Google listing has hours, relevant categories and accessibility details filled in, which is a solid base. What is missing costs you: no services menu and no Q&A activity, so patients scanning the map results see less than they do on competing listings. Photo volume and map ranking need a closer look together.
1.1 GBP Claim & Completeness 2 / 3
1.2 GBP Categories 2 / 3
1.3 Service Menu on GBP 0 / 3
1.4 GBP Photo Volume & Recency In your review
1.5 GBP Posts Frequency In your review
1.6 Local Pack Presence (Primary Terms) In your review
1.7 Q&A Section Activation 0 / 3
2Website & Infrastructure
75%
This is your strongest area. Booking sits at the top of the mobile screen, real treatment pages exist for your flagship services, and mobile speed is workable at 53. Scheduling lives on a separate booking subdomain rather than embedded on the site, a small friction point worth walking through.
2.1 Mobile Speed Score 2 / 3
2.2 Above-the-Fold Booking CTA 3 / 3
2.3 Online Scheduling Integration 2 / 3
2.4 Branded Treatment Page Coverage 2 / 3
2.5 Financing Surfacing In your review
3Reputation, Trust & Innovation
16%
This is where you lose the most. There is no before-and-after gallery on your own site, no responses to reviews, and no innovation or first-mover story on the page. Your eight named testimonials help, but patients deciding on visible results tend to choose a studio that shows them.
3.1 Google Review Volume (Market-Relative) In your review
3.2 Review Response Discipline 0 / 3
3.3 Before/After Gallery Depth & Consent 0 / 3
3.4 Board Certification & Society Visibility In your review
3.5 Patient Evidence Beyond Stars 2 / 3
3.6 Innovation Leadership & First-Mover Evidence 0 / 3
4Content & Discoverability (incl. AEO)
72%
AI search is a real bright spot: tools like ChatGPT and Google's AI name you and link to you often. The drag is your site's code labels, which mark you only as a generic organization rather than a medical business, so search engines have to guess what you do.
4.1 Blog Recency & Topical Depth In your review
4.2 Visibility in AI search 3 / 3
4.3 Schema Markup Completeness 1 / 3
4.4 Podcast/Video Content Indexing In your review
5Paid Media Presence
n/a
We could not read your paid advertising this pass; the ad library check was blocked and search-ad terms were not supplied. This is a coverage gap, not a failing, and we walk through it together in the review rather than guess.
5.1 Meta Ad Activity & Creative Variety In your review
5.2 Google Ads Presence (Competitive Terms) In your review
5.3 Landing Page Alignment In your review
6Social & Community
67%
Your link-in-bio hub works and points to your locations, and Instagram is clearly active with 25,700 followers. Posting cadence, engagement and content mix were not measurable from public data alone, so this area needs a shared look before we draw conclusions.
6.1 Instagram Posting Cadence In your review
6.2 Engagement Rate In your review
6.3 Content Mix Diversity In your review
6.4 Link-in-Bio Strategy 2 / 3
6.5 Story Highlights Organization In your review
7Identity & Citation Consistency
34%
The clearest issue is a phone number that differs between your Google profile and directories, which confuses both search engines and patients trying to call. Directory presence, any legacy naming, and cross-channel consistency were not fully visible and are best reviewed together.
7.1 NAP Consistency Across Directories 1 / 3
7.2 Aesthetic-Directory Presence In your review
7.3 One consistent identity online In your review
7.4 Cross-Channel Brand Consistency In your review
Fractional Aesthetics

That is the whole read: 16 signals measured from what a patient can see. The rest we go through together.

Prepared for Specimen XII, a Portland injector-led studio · 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 →