AI Visibility · Medical Spas
This is the one aesthetics category where the claim is already taken.
Several med spa agencies now sell generative search optimization. None of them publishes a measurement. That is the whole difference, and we would rather lead with it than pretend we invented the category.
Run it yourself
Here are the prompts. You do not need us to run them.
- Best med spa in {your city} for lip filler
- Where should I get Botox in {your city}?
- Most experienced injector near {your city}
- Is {your med spa} any good?
- Med spa vs dermatologist for injectables
- How much is Botox in {your city}?
Run all six. In dense markets the answers change noticeably by phrasing, which is itself informative, it usually means no practice in your area has established a stable entity, and that gap is available.
Why medical spas is different
Answer engines do not treat every specialty the same way.
Generic AI-search advice ignores this, which is why generic AI-search advice produces generic results.
The category is contested and the proof is not
At least three agencies in this niche sell AI search work, and at least one publishes machine-readable entity documentation. None of them publishes a citation measurement, an example report, or a case study. Competing here means competing on evidence, not on being first.
Competitive density is extreme
A dozen med spas inside five miles is normal. Assistants respond to that by hedging, listing, or naming whichever practice has the strongest corroborated signal, rarely the one with the best clinical outcomes.
Safety hedging cuts against you
Assistants asked about injectables frequently steer toward physician oversight. A med spa with a clearly stated medical director and scope answers that hedge; one without it gets routed to a dermatologist.
Your clinical depth is the hardest thing to make legible
Injector training and judgment are exactly what a patient is trying to assess and exactly what a system has the least to go on. Practices that state credentials, oversight and scope in a machine-readable way give an answer engine something to work with. Most give it a price list.
The measurement
What a baseline actually consists of.
Asking an agency whether they do AI search is not a useful question, because everyone says yes. The useful question is what their measurement actually consists of. This is ours, published before you buy anything, so you can compare it against anyone else's.
- Engines
- ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini
- Named, because an unnamed engine list is not a measurement.
- Prompt set
- ~20 questions a real patient would ask
- Published in full, so you or a skeptic can re-run them without us.
- What we record
- Whether you are named, in which engines, alongside whom
- Plus the competitors that appear when you do not.
- Cadence
- Baseline, then the identical set re-run at 90 days
- Same prompts, same engines, both dates published.
You keep the baseline document whether or not you continue with us.
The work
What we change, once we know where you stand.
- 01
Establish the practice as a resolvable entity
Consistent identity, medical director, scope of practice, injector credentials and treatment list across your site and the directories assistants read.
- 02
Answer the safety hedge directly
Medical oversight and complication management stated plainly. This is the specific thing that decides whether an assistant routes an injectables question to a med spa or away from one.
- 03
Build treatment-level surfaces
A real page per high-margin treatment, structured so an engine can state that you perform it, where, and who does it.
- 04
Measure against the specific practices inside your radius
Not a general score. Which named competitors appear when you do not, per engine, per prompt.
The limits
What we will not claim.
Every agency in this category promises citations. We would rather be specific about what is not available, because you will find out either way.
- We cannot guarantee an engine will recommend you, and in this category you will hear that promise from others.
- We did not invent this service and we will not imply we did. What we do differently is publish the measurement.
- We will not claim AI visibility fixes your conversion. If leads sit for eighteen hours before anyone calls, being named more often makes the leak bigger, not smaller. We will measure response time first and say so.
- Movement is uneven across engines and phrasings. We report the spread, not a single flattering number.
FAQ
Questions we get asked.
Our agency already says they do AI search. What would you add?
Ask them for your baseline: the prompt set, the engines, the dates, and whether you were named in each. If they can produce it, they are doing the work and you should stay. In the fifty-two agencies we audited, none published one. That is the entire distinction we are drawing, and it is a fair test to put to us as well.
Is this worth doing before we fix follow-up speed?
No, and we will say so on the first call. If inquiries wait hours before anyone responds, more visibility produces more leads that die in the same place. Response time is cheaper to fix and usually worth more. We would rather start there and do this second.
Do people actually ask assistants where to get Botox?
Some do, and we are not going to give you a percentage, the credible public data does not exist and every figure circulating comes from someone selling the service. The honest case is that measuring is cheap, entity work compounds, and the category is early enough that a stable answer is still available in most markets.
What do I actually get?
The prompt set, the engines, the date, whether you were named in each, and which named competitors appeared instead. Then the identical set re-run at 90 days. Both documents are yours regardless of what happens next.
Find out whether assistants name your medical spas practice.
A measured baseline across four engines, with the prompt set published so you can check it yourself. Yours to keep either way.