Example engagement ยท Healthcare: outpatient physical therapy clinics
AEO audit for an outpatient physical therapy group
A hypothetical nine-clinic physical therapy group, used to show how AEO HQ's audit would run in healthcare: prompts, crawler and listing checks, HIPAA-aware measurement, and the report. No results.
An example engagement for a hypothetical company, showing how the audit runs and what it delivers. It is not a client result.
Industry guide: SEO, AEO, and GEO for healthcare companies
The company
| Item | Profile (hypothetical) |
|---|---|
| Business | Nine outpatient physical therapy clinics under one brand in a U.S. metro area of about 2.5 million people |
| Staff | 41 licensed physical therapists (PTs), 17 physical therapist assistants, and front-desk staff at each clinic |
| Services | Orthopedic, sports, post-surgical, spine, and vestibular (dizziness) care at all clinics; pelvic health at three |
| Payers | Commercial insurance, Medicare, workers' compensation, and self-pay |
| How patients arrive | Referrals from surgeons and primary care practices; self-referral; Google Search and Maps; insurers' directories; word of mouth |
| Current marketing | A WordPress site with a page per clinic and a bio per PT; an appointment form asking for name, phone, insurer, and reason for visit; Google Analytics 4 (GA4) and an advertising pixel on every page; paid search ads; a text after discharge asking for a Google review; blog posts by staff PTs |
| Listings | A Google Business Profile per clinic; Healthgrades and Zocdoc profiles for some PTs; insurers' directories |
Self-referral is possible because all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands allow some form of direct access to physical therapists, with limits that differ by jurisdiction (American Physical Therapy Association; data as of July 2025). Patients also ask assistants: 32% of U.S. adults had used AI for health information or advice (KFF poll of 1,343 adults, early 2026), and 47% of 992 adults surveyed by a reputation-software company had used AI to research healthcare providers (April 2026). No study found for this example measures how assistants choose physical therapy clinics.
The questions patients ask assistants
The panel follows AEO HQ's measurement design: 40 patient intents, each written three ways (120 unbranded prompts), plus 20 branded prompts. Local prompts name a suburb near a clinic, and runs use a connection inside the metro, because ChatGPT may use an approximate location based on the user's IP address. Prompts come from generic questions, never from patient records.
Each prompt runs three times a week on each of the four assistants the audit measures (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews), in a new chat with a clean session; the ten most important prompts run eight times a week. Results are reported as rates with error ranges, not as single answers, because ChatGPT and Google's AI returned the same list of brands less than once in 100 repeated runs (vendor study; 2,961 runs). The table shows 12 of the 140 prompts.
| Intent | Example prompt (illustrative) | What a correct answer needs from the group |
|---|---|---|
| Condition | "Is physical therapy worth trying for a torn meniscus before surgery?" | A condition page by a named PT, with sources |
| Condition | "What helps sciatica besides pain pills?" | A spine page on what therapy can and cannot do |
| Finding a clinic | "Best physical therapy near [suburb] for lower back pain" | A Business Profile and page for the nearest clinic |
| Finding a clinic | "Physical therapist in [metro] who treats vertigo" | A vestibular page naming clinics and PTs |
| Finding a clinic | "Pelvic floor physical therapy in [metro] that takes Medicare" | A pelvic health page with clinics and payers |
| Access | "Do I need a doctor's referral to see a physical therapist in [state]?" | A dated page on state and payer rules |
| Access | "Physical therapy open Saturdays near [neighborhood]" | The same hours on every profile and page |
| Cost | "How much does physical therapy cost without insurance in [metro]?" | Published self-pay prices |
| Cost | "Is [brand] in network with [insurer]?" | A current insurance page |
| Comparison | "Physical therapist or chiropractor for lower back pain?" | A clinician-reviewed explainer with sources |
| Comparison | "[Brand] or [competitor] for ACL rehab?" | Checkable facts: testing, staff, locations |
| Reputation | "[Brand] reviews" | Review profiles, handled within the rules below |
How the assistants reach the clinics
An assistant can cite a clinic page through search only after its search system has crawled and indexed it. The diagrams show the documented routes; how AI assistants find and cite sources has the details.
- AI Overviews and AI Mode link to pages that are indexed and eligible for a snippet, and Google says Business Profiles can help a business be visible "in both AI responses and other Google Search results".
- Microsoft says Bing and Copilot "rely on the same core crawling, indexing, and ranking foundation as traditional search", so pages must be in Bing's index.
- Sites that block OAI-SearchBot "will not be shown in ChatGPT search answers"; Claude-SearchBot and PerplexityBot play the same role for Claude and Perplexity.
- Anthropic lists Brave Search as a web-search subprocessor, and Brave's crawler does not crawl a page that Googlebot may not crawl.
Search-engine routes to the clinics
Google Search
- 01GooglebotCrawls clinic pages, PT bios, and condition pages
- 02Google indexIndexed pages eligible for a snippet
- 03AI Overviews, AI ModeLink to indexed, snippet-eligible pages
Google local
- 01Business ProfilesOne per clinic, plus eligible PTs
- Name
- Address
- Hours
- Category
- 02Local business dataRanked by relevance, distance, and prominence
- 03AI responsesCan include local business information
Microsoft
- 01BingbotFinds pages through sitemaps and IndexNow
- 02Bing indexShared by Bing search and Copilot
- 03Microsoft CopilotBuilt on Bing's crawling and index
Assistant crawlers and indexes
OpenAI
- 01OAI-SearchBotCrawls for ChatGPT search; GPTBot is separate
- 02OpenAI index + partnersPartners include Microsoft and local listings
- 03ChatGPT searchUses approximate location for local results
Anthropic
- 01Claude-SearchBotIndexes pages for Claude's search results
- 02Brave Search + own indexBrave's crawler follows Googlebot's rules
- 03Claude web searchSearches when facts are current or specific
Perplexity
- 01PerplexityBotControlled by robots.txt; not used for training
- 02Perplexity indexNo third-party index documented
- 03Perplexity answersSurface and link the pages used
Directories carry weight: in 6.8 million citations studied by a listings-management company, listings were 52.6% of healthcare citations, "with WebMD and Vitals and industry-specific directories dominating visibility" (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity; mid-2025). A strong Maps position does not carry over on its own: for dentists, the domains cited by Google and by a web-enabled AI engine overlapped by 11.9% (preprint).
What the audit checks
Crawling, indexing, and page text
- Crawler rules. robots.txt is read per crawler, since a crawler follows the group that names it and uses the
*group only when none does. Search crawlers are checked apart from training crawlers (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and the Google-Extended token), because OpenAI's settings are independent. - Firewall and CDN. ChatGPT search needs the host or content delivery network to allow OpenAI's searchbot IP addresses.
- Index coverage of the nine clinic pages and 41 bios, in Search Console and Bing Webmaster Tools.
- Facts in the HTML. In Vercel's December 2024 data, none of the major AI crawlers rendered JavaScript, so addresses, hours, and insurers must be in the HTML the server sends.
- No doorway pages for suburbs without a clinic, a pattern Google's spam policies name as doorway abuse.
Listings and the group's facts
- Business Profiles. Google requires the same name across a chain's locations unless the real-world name varies, the same category where they offer the same service, and profiles only for public-facing practitioners who can be reached at the location, never one per specialization.
- Directories. Names, addresses, phones, hours, insurers, and PT credentials are compared with one fact sheet across Business Profiles, Healthgrades, Zocdoc, and insurers' directories.
- Structured data. Each clinic page uses Google's most specific LocalBusiness subtype, which on schema.org is Physiotherapy, matching the visible text. The audit does not treat markup as a citation lever: adding it to 1,885 pages brought no reliable gain in AI citations (vendor study).
Content that answers patient questions
Health is a "YMYL Health or Safety" topic in Google's rater guidelines, and Google's systems give more weight to strong E-E-A-T (experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness) on such topics. Each condition page should name the PT who wrote or reviewed it, link to a bio with license and credentials, show a date, and cite sources.
Rules that limit claims, testimonials, and reviews
Measurement that stays within HIPAA
HHS's bulletin on tracking technologies says trackers behind a patient login "generally have access to PHI," that a vendor receiving PHI needs a business associate agreement (BAA), that trackers on appointment-scheduling pages "may have access to PHI," and that a cookie banner is not a valid HIPAA authorization. A June 2024 court order vacated only the part covering an IP address linked to a visit to a public page about specific conditions or providers; HHS says it is evaluating next steps. Google offers no BAA for Google Analytics and says HIPAA-regulated customers "may only use Google Analytics on pages that are not HIPAA-covered".
The audit maps every tag on every page type and each vendor that receives data. It recommends measuring AI referrals only on pages the privacy officer and counsel clear, and counting appointment requests by source inside the scheduling system. AEO HQ receives monthly totals and no PHI.
Sample findings
These are sample findings for the hypothetical group, showing the form a finding takes. They describe no real clinic, and nothing in them was measured.
| # | Finding (sample) | Evidence to collect | Impact | Effort | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The appointment form sends "reason for visit" from a page that loads GA4 and an ad pixel | Network log of each tag; form fields; vendors and BAAs | High: possible PHI disclosure; settle before adding measurement | Medium | Privacy officer, web developer, counsel |
| 2 | robots.txt blocks OAI-SearchBot, Claude-SearchBot, and PerplexityBot, though the aim was to opt out of training | robots.txt; logs by user agent | High: ChatGPT search does not show sites that block OAI-SearchBot | Low | Web developer; leadership decides |
| 3 | Addresses, hours, and insurers load through a JavaScript clinic finder | Raw HTML compared with the rendered page | High for local and insurance prompts | Medium | Web developer |
| 4 | Two Business Profiles add the neighborhood to the brand name; the signs do not | Profile names; photos of signs | Medium: breaks Google's chain naming rule | Low | Operations director |
| 5 | A clinic that moved in 2025 shows its old address on Healthgrades and one insurer's directory | Listing exports; dated screenshots; branded-prompt answers | High for that clinic | Low | Front-desk lead |
| 6 | Three "success story" pages name patients and describe their surgery | Page list; privacy officer's check for authorizations | High: the Cadia pattern | Low to remove | Privacy officer |
| 7 | Some review replies mention the reviewer's treatment | Sample of replies from all nine profiles | High: public disclosure risk | Low | Operations director, privacy officer |
| 8 | The discharge text asks only patients who scored 9 or 10 for a review | Text workflow settings | High: Google bans selective requests | Low | Operations director |
| 9 | The spine page says "most patients avoid surgery" and cites no study | The claim; the evidence relied on | Medium: substantiation; assistants may repeat it | Medium | Clinical director |
| 10 | The referral page says "No referral needed" without state or payer limits | Practice act; payer policies; date checked | Medium: patients ask this directly | Low | Clinical director, billing manager |
| 11 | Condition pages lack author, reviewer, and date; 12 of 41 bios lack credentials | Page-by-page audit | Medium: trust signals on health topics | Medium | Marketing manager, clinical director |
The deliverable
The report has nine parts, followed by a readout call.
- Summary. Scope, dates, assistants tested, and the ten fixes to make first.
- Method. The full panel, session controls, run counts, matching rules, and statistics.
- Baseline measurement. For each assistant: mention rate, citation rate, share of voice against named competing clinics, and accuracy on branded prompts, each with a 95% interval; and the cited domains, sorted into the group's pages, directories, insurers, and publishers. No pooled score and no rank.
- Crawler access and indexing. A table by user agent (allowed, blocked in robots.txt, blocked at the CDN), index coverage in Google and Bing, and the rendering check.
- Listings and fact sheet. One fact sheet per clinic and a table of mismatches across profiles and directories.
- Content gaps. Each intent mapped to a page or marked as a gap.
- Claims and privacy items. Each with the rule text and a link, for the privacy officer and counsel to decide. AEO HQ flags these items; it gives no legal or HIPAA compliance advice and does not review clinical accuracy.
- Priority fix list and measurement plan. Every finding with impact, effort, owner, and evidence, and the plan below.
- Run log. Every answer and citation from the baseline, as a spreadsheet.
Measurement plan
The plan follows how to measure AI visibility: rates use Wilson intervals, which suit small samples, and a change counts only when the interval for the difference excludes zero.
| Metric | Method | Frequency | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mention rate on unbranded prompts, per assistant | Share of runs naming the group; Wilson interval; cluster bootstrap by intent | Weekly runs; 4-week windows | Tracking tool or spreadsheet run log |
| Citation rate and cited domains | Share of runs citing a group page; domains sorted by type | Same | Same |
| Share of voice | Group mentions divided by mentions of 5 to 10 named competitors | Same | Same |
| Accuracy | 20 branded prompts graded against the fact sheet | Every 4 weeks | Run log and fact sheet |
| Listing consistency | Field-by-field comparison across profiles and directories | Monthly | Listings spreadsheet |
| AI Overviews and AI Mode impressions | Generative AI performance report, which counts impressions, not clicks (opens in a new tab) | Monthly | Search Console |
| Copilot citations | AI Performance report (opens in a new tab) | Monthly | Bing Webmaster Tools |
| Crawler and fetcher requests | Logs by user agent, including Claude-User, which fetches a page for a live answer | Monthly | Server or CDN logs |
| AI referral visits | AI Assistant channel (opens in a new tab) plus a custom channel, on cleared pages only | Monthly | GA4 |
| New patients by self-reported source | "How did you hear about us?" at intake, with AI assistants as options; totals only | Monthly | Practice-management system |
Engagement timeline
The pricing page gives the audit's current delivery time; this example assumes about two weeks from completed intake.
| Week | Activities |
|---|---|
| Intake | Read-only access to Search Console, Bing Webmaster Tools, GA4, the site, and the Business Profiles; the fact sheet; 5 to 10 competitors; a named privacy officer; a written rule that no PHI is shared with AEO HQ |
| Week 1 | Crawl and crawler-access checks; tag, listings, and claims inventories; panel drafted, reviewed by the group, and frozen; baseline runs start |
| Week 2 | Runs finish; coding and accuracy grading; findings ranked; privacy and claims items sent to the privacy officer; report and readout call |
| After delivery | The group runs the measurement plan on its own schedule |
How the example audit runs
Measure
- 01Prompt panel40 intents in 3 phrasings, plus 20 branded
- 02Repeated runsNew chat per run, fixed metro location
- 03CodingMentions, citations, and facts checked by a person
- 04Baseline ratesPer assistant, with 95% intervals
Fix
- 01FindingsEach tied to evidence and an owner
- 02Privacy and claims reviewPrivacy officer and counsel decide
- 03Priority fix listOrdered by impact and effort
- 04Re-measureSame panel in 4-week windows
- Prompts
- 140
- Assistants run
- 4
- Runs per prompt per week
- 3 (8 for top 10)
- Baseline window
- 2 weeks
What this example does not show
- Results. No rates, citations, traffic, or patient numbers, because the group does not exist. No study has measured how long changes like these take to show up in AI answers.
- Real prompts. A real panel comes from the group's intake calls, front-desk questions, and Search Console queries.
- Legal or clinical conclusions. HIPAA, practice acts, and payer rules are summarized, not applied; the privacy officer and counsel decide, and the group's clinicians judge clinical content.
- Evidence specific to physical therapy. The surveys and citation studies cited cover healthcare in general, and several come from companies that sell related services.
- Every assistant. Runs cover four assistants. Copilot and Google AI Mode appear only through Microsoft's and Google's reports, and Claude only through logs and referrals.
Next step
The audit's current scope, price, and delivery time are on the pricing page. The healthcare industry page covers AEO for healthcare more broadly, and the methodology page gives the full measurement design.