X-twitter Instagram Linkedin
Skip to content
  • 7 blog posts a week
  • 500+ pages at the entry tier
  • Every number sourced
(949) 628-6500
Schedule a Meeting
Results

A percentage without its starting number is decoration.

A tenfold lift means nothing until you know whether it started at two hundred visitors or twenty thousand. So every figure on this page carries its baseline, its timeframe and the property it was measured in. Four engagements, and the one that shows the failure mode as well as the fix.

Schedule a Meeting See the numbers

Reported by specialty rather than by name. No client appears in a public asset without written permission on file, so the practices below are described and not identified.

Individual results vary by market, specialty, budget and starting position. Nothing here is a prediction of your outcome.

Steven Lockhart reviewing client performance data at his desk
The one that proves the standard 100 pages, flattened. 500+, reaccelerated. The only case here that shows what does not work as well as what does. It is why the entry tier is 500 pages. See the ladder proof
Measured in GA4 Each practice's own Google Analytics 4 property. Where a figure comes from elsewhere, we say so.
01
The reporting standard

Read this before the numbers. It is the part that makes them worth reading.

Five rules we hold ourselves to on every results claim, in an asset, a proposal or a monthly report. They exist because this category publishes percentage-lift cards with no starting number, and we would rather be checkable than impressive.

  1. 01

    Every figure carries its baseline

    No growth percentage appears without the number it grew from and the window it grew over. A result that cannot be stated that way does not get published, however good it looks.

  2. 02

    The measurement source is named

    All traffic figures below are from each practice's own Google Analytics 4 property. Where a number comes from somewhere else, such as a provider count or a surgical schedule, the entry says so and attributes it to the practice.

  3. 03

    Relationships are disclosed

    One of the engagements below is our founder's own practice. It is labelled as founder-owned every time it is cited, and it should be weighted accordingly rather than read as an arm's-length client result.

  4. 04

    No practice is named without permission

    Written attribution permission goes on file before a client name appears in a public asset. Until then the engagement runs anonymised by specialty — which is what you are reading.

  5. 05

    The miss is reported beside the win

    In the monthly report, every month, in the same document, before you ask. One of the cases below is on this page specifically because it includes a period where the work stopped working.

  6. 06

    Nothing here is a guarantee

    We do not guarantee rankings, inquiry volume or revenue, in any form, including implied forms. Results depend on market conditions, competitive density, specialty, budget, starting position, and factors inside your practice such as intake capacity.

02
Three measured engagements

Each at a different point on the same build.

One launched from zero. One compounding over six months. One that shows a 100-page site flatten and a 500-page rebuild reaccelerate. Together they are the argument; separately each answers a different question.

Psychiatry · January to August 2026 · the page ladder proof

A 100-page site flattened. The rebuild to 500+ reaccelerated it.

A psychiatry practice spent the first half of 2026 on a 100-page site, where traffic grew and then flattened. After a rebuild to more than 500 pages went live in July, monthly active users rose 61.3% and then 68.4%, reaching 3,400 in August against 428 in January. The practice grew from two providers to five over the same period, with a sixth added in October.

This is the only case in our register that shows the failure mode as well as the fix, which is why it is first. It is also the measured basis for the page ladder. Traffic grew through the winter, then went flat and fell in April and again in June. A 100-page site carries a practice only so far. The reacceleration lands exactly at the relaunch.

The business outcome is stronger than the traffic. Each of the practice's original two providers was running a full ten patients a day. It now runs five. When an owner asks why our entry tier is 500 pages rather than 100, this is the answer — and it is why the older 100-page figure was retired rather than softened.

Traffic measured in Google Analytics 4; provider counts are the practice's own. Views rather than sessions is this property's tracked reach metric. Anonymised by specialty pending written attribution permission.

  • Pages published100 → 500+Start of year to the July relaunch
  • Monthly active users428 → 3,400January to August 2026 · +694% over eight months
  • Views953 → 6,300Same window
  • Providers2 → 5A sixth added in October · practice's own figure
  • The two months after relaunch+61.3%, +68.4%July and August, the strongest on the chart
Spine surgery · July to August 2026 · launched from zero

New site, no traffic history, and surgeries doubled in sixty days.

A spine practice launched a new site in July 2026 with no traffic history and reached roughly 2,500 monthly active users in its second full month. Over the same two months the practice doubled its scheduled surgeries.

This is the case to read if the question is whether a new build can produce inside a quarter, and it is what the Build phase is scoped to deliver. Traffic was effectively zero before launch, so there is no baseline to argue about — the starting number is nothing.

The doubled surgical schedule is the most important number on this page, and it is the practice's own rather than an analytics measure. Traffic is a means; a booked procedure is the outcome. Where we can report the second, we lead with it.

Traffic measured in Google Analytics 4; the surgical figure is the practice's own. Anonymised by specialty pending written attribution permission.

  • Active users, July from launch1,200Site went live the first week of July 2026
  • Active users, August2,500First full month after launch month
  • Active users, first ~60 days~3,700From an effective zero
  • Sessions, first ~60 days~4,300Google Analytics 4
  • Scheduled surgeriesDoubledSame two-month window · practice's own figure
Telepsychiatry · March to August 2026 · founder-owned, disclosed

Six consecutive months, each higher than the last.

A telepsychiatry practice went from 754 monthly active users in March 2026 to 9,000 in August, as the site grew from 500 published pages to more than 1,000.

This is our founder's own practice. It is disclosed as a related party rather than an arm's-length client every time it is cited, and it should be weighted accordingly. We publish it anyway because it answers a question the other two cannot: does the system compound, or does it spike?

Month by month the active users ran 754, 1,900, 2,900, 5,800, 6,600, 9,000. Every month after the page-ladder build landed higher than the month before — which is the part that matters, because the April jump was not a spike that decayed.

Measured in Google Analytics 4. Founder-owned practice, disclosed. The March figure predates the page-ladder build.

  • Pages published500 → 1,000+Start of build to early August
  • Monthly active users754 → 9,000March to August 2026 · +1,094% over six months
  • Sessions882 → 9,200+20.2% August over July
  • Consecutive rising months6 of 6754 · 1,900 · 2,900 · 5,800 · 6,600 · 9,000
03
The first client

Five providers to more than forty, in eighteen months.

The first practice run through the full method was a psychiatry group with five providers. Inside eighteen months it had grown past forty providers, and annual revenue had gone from roughly $1.5 million to more than $30 million.

5 → 40+providers, up from a five-provider psychiatry group at the start of the engagement
$1.5M → $30M+in annual revenue over the same eighteen-month period

It was a psychiatry practice, and it runs anonymised, by specialty, with the baseline and the timeframe attached, because the practice is not named in any asset unless and until written permission is on file. It is one practice in one market rather than a prediction of your outcome, and a result at that scale is not what a typical engagement produces.

Get trusted: the authority signals that make a practice credible to patients and to search engines
Also published

15:1 average client ROI

Our own reported engagement average across client work, not third-party research. Individual results vary by market, specialty and starting position.

Also published

340% average organic growth

Likewise our own reported average, each engagement measured against a documented starting baseline rather than an estimate.

What is not published

Client count

Not published, by decision. We never imply a team size or a roster size in either direction — you can draw your own conclusion on the call.

04
How to use this page

Different questions, different case.

If you are comparing agencies, these are the arguments each engagement can actually carry — and the ones it cannot.

Which case answers which question
If the question is…ReadBecause
Is the page ladder a real standard or a preference? The psychiatry case It shows a 100-page site flatten and a 500-page rebuild reaccelerate, in the same property, in the same year.
Can a new site produce inside a quarter? The spine case Launched from an effective zero to roughly 2,500 monthly active users in its second month.
Does the system compound or spike? The telepsychiatry case Six consecutive months each higher than the last. Weight it as founder-owned.
Did marketing produce patients rather than traffic? The spine and psychiatry cases Doubled scheduled surgeries, and two providers to five. Lead with these two — they are business outcomes, not reach metrics.
Does the build repeat across a group or a network? All three They run the same brand book, the same SEO instruction set, the same page ladder and the same content cadence.
What will my practice do? None of them That is what the discovery call and your own baseline are for. A case study is evidence a method works somewhere, not a forecast for you.
Steven Lockhart working through patient acquisition arithmetic on a whiteboard
The check you can run now

Every number on this page has a source beside it.

Scroll back and look. Then look at how the rest of this category publishes health statistics and growth percentages. That difference is the whole position, and it is the one thing you can verify before you ever speak to us.

05
The number in every forecast

One estimate we use, and the caveat it never travels without.

If an agency forecasts patient inquiries for you, it is using a conversion assumption somewhere. Most do not tell you what it is. Ours is on this page.

Roughly 2% of site visits converting to a patient inquiry

We use that as a planning benchmark for scoping and forecasting. It is an internal estimate and it is not a guaranteed or externally verified rate.

How it may be used: in a proposal or a planning conversation, labelled as an estimate, with the caveat in the same breath rather than in a footnote. It gets replaced by your practice's own tracked conversion rate as soon as ninety days of first-party data exist.

How it may never be used: as a performance claim, in an advertisement, on a website, or anywhere a reasonable reader would take it as what a specific practice will achieve. A conversion rate presented as an outcome is a performance claim requiring substantiation, and no asset we ship carries guarantee language.

The required caveat, verbatim: This is a planning estimate built on a general benchmark, not a guarantee for any specific practice. Actual conversion depends on the specialty, the market, and how quickly a practice's front desk responds to inquiries.

That last line is not legal boilerplate bolted onto a sales number. The front-desk clause is the operative part: we have turned down engagements because the phone went unanswered at lunch, and marketing spend against an intake that cannot receive it becomes a leak rather than a return. If your practice is in that position, the fix is one month of intake work before the engagement starts — and we will say so before the contract.

06
On the evidence

The questions this page should raise.

Because written attribution permission is not yet on file for them, and our own standard is that no client appears in a public asset until it is. Naming a practice without that is a decision made for our benefit at their expense, and in behavioral health it can also disclose something about their patients' care that is not ours to disclose. The trade-off is real: an anonymised case is weaker evidence than a named one. We would rather publish the weaker version honestly than the stronger version without asking.

It would, if we did not say so. It is labelled founder-owned and disclosed as a related party every time it is cited, and you should discount it accordingly — a practice where the marketer controls every decision is not a fair test of client work. We keep it because it answers one question the other two cannot: whether the system compounds month over month rather than producing one spike. If you want the arm's-length evidence only, read the spine and psychiatry cases and ignore this one.

It is a short record, and the reason is that the agency was founded in 2025. We could pad this page — the category does, routinely, with percentage cards that have no baseline and logos from relationships that lasted a quarter. What we can offer instead is a different kind of evidence you can check right now without our help: open our blog and count the posts, look at the depth of our own site, and check whether every statistic we publish names its source. Our own standards are published too. Our founder's individual track record predates the agency and is stated separately.

We cannot tell you that, and anyone who does is guessing or selling. What these cases establish is that the method has produced measurable outcomes in three different properties at three different starting points. What they cannot establish is your outcome, which depends on your market's competitive density, your specialty, your budget, your starting position and your intake capacity. The honest version: on the first call you get a view of what we think is achievable in your market and how long it takes, and if we are wrong the monthly report shows it before you have to ask.

Rankings start moving at three to four months. Local search moves faster, usually two to four. Patient inquiries follow at six to twelve months, and the strongest returns land between twelve and eighteen. A workable site is live in weeks two to three (the full build calendar is published), so something a patient can find exists almost immediately — but the compounding is the part that takes a year, and compressing that in a proposal would be a lie that costs you more than the wait.

A fair question and one we would rather answer here than be asked in month nine. Failure is: the content shipped on cadence, the pages indexed, the rankings moved, and your schedule did not change. If that happens the problem is downstream of visibility (intake, conversion path, capacity, or a payer mix that makes the new patients uneconomic) and the monthly report is built to surface which, because it carries the miss beside the win. Analytics and Reporting is an Infrastructure service for exactly that reason. What is not failure, and what we will keep saying, is month four looking like month three. That is the timeline working as published.

All traffic figures on this page are measured in each practice's own Google Analytics 4 property. Provider counts, surgical volumes and revenue figures are the practices' own. The 15:1 average client ROI and 340% average organic growth figures are Healthcare Marketing's own reported engagement averages rather than third-party research. We do not guarantee rankings, inquiry volume or revenue. Ask us something harder, or call (949) 628-6500.

The next move

Now get the number for your own market.

Thirty minutes with Steven and you will know who ranks for the terms you should own, how deep their site is, what your starting baseline actually is, and what it would take to move it. If the honest answer is that you should not spend the money yet, that is the answer you get.

Schedule a Meeting Or score your site first No contract on the first call. No proposal you did not ask for.
Vital Voice Online

Schedule a Consultation

Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you within 24 hours.

Request Sent!

We've received your request and will be in touch within 24 hours.

Something went wrong