Organic search results for Artemis Hospitals, read from the client’s own Google Search Console — screenshots unedited, with the figures transcribed underneath.
Case file D12 · Ongoing
The engagement
Behind the portfolio
A multi-specialty programme needs a clear view of organic visibility across its search presence.
Inspect the original 12-month Search Console report and the separate AI-features report.
Google Search Console
Unedited screenshots from the client’s own Search Console property, captured in September 2026 for organic web search. Open any report to see it full size.
Case files
Adjacent files
If you’re here, you’re probably comparing similar engagements. Here’s the surrounding work — services, problems we solved on the way, and the cities where this kind of programme runs.
Ready for your own case file?
We’ll show you the growth gap for your practice and the 90-day plan to close it.
You’ll speak with a senior strategistBehind the programme
Programmes like Artemis Hospitals's usually combine multi-location SEO, healthcare media buying and doctor and department pages. The thinking behind them is on our hospital marketing page and in the hospital marketing guide.
The hospital marketing system page sets out scope and pricing. Similar programmes include Indraprastha Apollo and Raj Hospitals, and the methodology explains how results are attributed.
Practical notes & supporting evidence
Client contextArtemis Hospitals · Hospital
Channels managedSEO · Ads · Social · YouTube
Public evidenceOriginal Search Console reports
Read alongsideThe source period, programme scope and your own practice baseline
Artemis Hospitals — Multi-specialty digital programme is filed in the hospital collection. The engagement record identifies channels managed as SEO · Ads · Social · YouTube and multi-specialty as Gurugram. Its published window is Ongoing. These details establish the scope available for public inspection. Read them alongside the client-specific material on this page when assessing whether the example relates to your own brief.
A multi-specialty programme needs a clear view of organic visibility across its search presence. Inspect the original 12-month Search Console report and the separate AI-features report. The material can be inspected directly in the gallery or source-report section above. Keep each item’s caption with it when discussing the collection: the caption identifies the client and the purpose of the work shown.
The published source evidence for Artemis Hospitals includes Performance · last 12 months: 1.09M clicks · 219M impressions · average position 6.8. Generative AI features · last 3 months: 7.98M impressions in Google's AI features. These figures are transcribed from the reports displayed on this page. Keep the original screenshot and its stated period beside the numbers when using them in a comparison or presentation.
Search impressions and clicks measure visibility and interaction in the reported search surface. Average position is an aggregate in the source report, not a promise that every query appears at that position. A report for AI features has its own scope and should remain labelled separately. The screenshots do not establish attended appointments or collected revenue. Those outcomes require the practice’s intake and financial records and a clear method for relating them to the search activity.
Multi-specialty providers need a consistent brand while preserving accurate department, clinician and location information. Map the enquiry to the department capable of answering it and identify who maintains those details. A central publishing system is useful only when local service changes can be reflected reliably. For an initial review, test the journey for a small number of high-priority departments before treating the homepage as representative of the whole hospital experience.
Separate the searches that ask for information from the searches that ask for an appointment. A person comparing treatments needs an explanation of options, suitability and the questions to ask a clinician. A person searching for a named specialist needs a current profile, the locations where that doctor consults and an obvious contact route. Sending both visitors to a generic homepage makes the next step harder to find. Build a small intent map before commissioning another batch of articles, and check whether an existing page already answers each question.
For a search review, keep the query, landing page, reporting period and search type together. Impressions describe exposure in the report; clicks describe visits from that search surface. Neither measures attended appointments. A useful investigation also checks indexing, canonical URLs, internal links and the mobile page experience. Compare equivalent periods and annotate significant website changes. A different service mix or a seasonal campaign can change demand without any change in the quality of the SEO work.
Medical explanations should identify the clinician responsible for checking clinical statements and provide a way to verify relevant qualifications. Marketing advice has a different authoring requirement: explain who publishes it, what evidence supports examples and which assumptions limit a recommendation. A professional biography belongs beside the relevant material or within an easy link, rather than being hidden in a general team directory. Only attach a review attribution after that review actually happens.
Keep the main heading descriptive and let subheadings follow the reader’s decision. Use links that name the destination, such as a treatment guide or a specialist profile. Images need nearby explanation and accurate alternative text; adding keywords to an unrelated picture does not make it supporting evidence. The same principle applies to structured data: markup should describe what readers can verify on the page. Keep page titles, descriptions and canonical URLs consistent with the page’s actual topic.
