Clinic·Signal
AI Search Visibility Audit
Prepared for
Aurelia Aesthetics, Didsbury
Assessed
27 August 2026
Queries tested
12 patient questions
Reference
CS-2608-AUR
2of 12 queries

Your clinic is invisible to the tools your patients now ask first.

Across twelve questions a real patient would put to an AI assistant before booking, Aurelia was named twice. Nine competing clinics were named more often. One assistant described your clinic as being run by a practitioner who works elsewhere.

01

What was tested

Twelve buyer-intent questions were put to AI-assisted search, phrased the way patients actually ask them, not as search keywords. Each answer was recorded for whether Aurelia was named, where it ranked, and which source the recommendation was drawn from.

Every factual claim below was verified against your own website or the relevant regulator register before being included.

02

Query results

# Patient question Named Source the assistant used
01Best aesthetic clinic in DidsburyNoFresha listing page
02Who does the most natural-looking lip filler in south ManchesterNoGlowday editorial
03Safest place to get Botox near Didsbury4th of 5Save Face register
04Nurse-led aesthetics clinic Manchester with free consultationNoTreatwell
05How much is Profhilo in ManchesterNoThe Aesthetic Standard
06Aesthetic doctor Manchester who treats tear troughsNoRealSelf
07Top rated skin clinic near West Didsbury5th of 6Local listicle
08Where to get anti-wrinkle injections south ManchesterNoFresha listing page
09Best clinic for polynucleotides ManchesterNoWhatClinic
10Aesthetics clinic Manchester with a doctor not a beauticianNoTop Doctors
11Skin boosters near me Manchester reviewsNoTreatwell
12Is Botox safe — who should I go to in ManchesterNoSave Face register

In ten of twelve answers the assistant recommended clinics from a directory or listicle rather than from any clinic's own website.

03

Who is being recommended instead

Clinic A, Deansgate9
Clinic B, Chorlton8
Clinic C, Wilmslow6
Clinic D, Didsbury5
Aurelia Aesthetics2

Clinic D is four hundred metres from your door and appears in more than twice as many answers.

04

Findings, ranked by impact

01
Critical · Misattribution

An assistant is crediting your clinic to another practitioner

Asked who runs Aurelia, one assistant returned a doctor who practises at a different clinic entirely, with their qualifications attached to your business name.

“Aurelia Aesthetics in Didsbury is led by Dr ——, an NHS GP with Level 7 postgraduate aesthetic training.”

That person has never worked at your clinic. A patient checking your credentials before booking an injectable is being given someone else's. This is the single most damaging finding in the report and the fastest to correct.

02
Critical · Source absence

You are missing from three of the four directories these answers are built on

Ten of twelve recommendations were drawn from Save Face, Glowday, Fresha, Treatwell, WhatClinic or Top Doctors. You appear on one. Assistants cannot recommend a clinic they have no record of, and no amount of work on your own website changes that — the head terms are won on other people's pages.

03
High · Machine readability

Your website carries no machine-readable clinic identity

There is no structured data describing Aurelia as a medical business: no address, no opening hours, no practitioner record, no treatment list, no review rating in any form a machine can parse. To an assistant reading your site, you are unlabelled text.

04
High · Answer coverage

You have a treatment menu. Patients search for their problem.

Nobody searches for “hyaluronidase” — they search for the lumpy lip they want fixed. Nobody searches “Dermalan” — they search for the brown patches on their face. Patients describe a condition; assistants answer with whoever wrote about that condition.

Your site lists what you sell. It has no page about dark circles, melasma, rosacea, excessive sweating or hair thinning. In our study of 78 Greater Manchester clinics, every clinic with a dedicated conditions section was named more than once, and the clinic that won twelve of twenty-five questions had one. Queries 05 and 12 — cost and safety — were also sourced from third parties who answered them when you didn't.

05
Medium · Geographic ambiguity

Some queries resolve to Manchester, New Hampshire

Without an explicit country in your structured data, a share of “Manchester” queries return American clinics. Corrected in a single afternoon.

06
Medium · Credential signalling

Your regulator registration is not stated anywhere machine-readable

Assistants repeatedly cited accreditation and registration as the reason for recommending a clinic. Yours exists but is invisible — it appears only inside an image on your About page.

05

What we would do about it

Full Programme

£1,200 one-off
  • Misattribution corrected at source
  • Listings built and verified across all six directories
  • Full structured-data implementation
  • Eight to ten condition pages written and published
  • 90-day re-test, before and after

Foundation

£697 one-off
  • Listings, structured data and llms.txt
  • Name, address and phone made consistent
  • Credentials made machine-readable
  • Five working days
  • Condition pages can be added later