Service
Capture the intent that already exists.
Search captures explicit patient intent: people looking for care, treatments, providers, or research opportunities — including queries like "clinical trial near me." The work is query-level control: buying the intent that can become a valuable downstream outcome and excluding the intent that cannot.
What the work is
What we actually do.
Search captures explicit patient intent. The work is deciding which queries deserve budget and proving which ones do not.
Query-level control
Match types, negatives, and search-term review run as a standing discipline, so budget stays on queries with a plausible path to eligibility.
Intent segmentation
Care-seeking, treatment, condition, symptom, provider, and explicit trial-seeking intent are separated because they convert and qualify differently.
Geo-targeting to serviceable markets
Location structures built around where the operation can actually serve patients — whether that means provider coverage, licensure, delivery geography, or active-site catchments.
Landing experience alignment
Ad, keyword, and pre-screener aligned so the question a person asked is the question the page answers.
Intent segmentation
Five tiers of intent that convert nothing alike.
Collapsing these into one campaign hides which tier is producing eligible traffic and which is quietly absorbing the budget.
| Tier | Looks like | How we treat it |
|---|---|---|
| Trial-seeking | “clinical trials near me”, “participate in a study” | Smallest volume, highest intent, and the only tier where the person already understands what they are signing up for. Usually the first thing to fully fund. |
| Care-seeking | “telehealth for [condition]”, “doctor for [condition] near me” | High-intent demand from people actively looking for a path to care. Valuable when geography, provider coverage, and the patient journey can actually support the query. |
| Treatment | named therapies, procedures, second-opinion queries | People actively managing a diagnosis. Converts well and screens in reasonably, but competes with commercial healthcare advertisers on cost. |
| Condition | the diagnosis itself, disease-stage queries | Broad, and mixes patients with caregivers, students, and clinicians. Worth buying only with tight negatives and a screener that filters early. |
| Symptom | pre-diagnosis descriptions of how someone feels | Largest volume, weakest eligibility signal. Frequently where a lead-volume-optimized account has quietly been spending most of the budget. |
A perfect query from someone outside a serviceable geography — whether that means provider coverage or an active-site catchment — is a click we should not have bought.
What you get
Deliverables, not promises.
Concrete artefacts and a working cadence. These are the outcomes the work is designed to improve, not guarantees: results also depend on patient demand, qualification, operational capacity, geography, and specialty-specific constraints such as protocol difficulty or site capacity. We commit to the work rather than to a number.
- Campaign structure segmented by intent type with documented negative lists
- Geo targeting mapped to the markets, provider coverage, or site catchments the operation can actually serve
- A standing search-term review cadence, with exclusions fed back into the build
- Reporting that ties query segments to qualification and downstream patient outcomes
FAQ
The questions healthcare teams actually ask.
Enrollment economics. Cost per lead is a checkpoint, not the goal. In clinical-trial recruitment we reconcile screening and enrollment outcomes back to source; in other healthcare models the equivalent may be a qualified patient, booked visit, completed consultation, treatment start, or another downstream outcome that actually determines the economics.
Through whatever approved system can provide it — EHR or CRM exports, booking status, CTMS data, referral outcomes, call-center dispositions, or even a simple weekly reconciliation. We use the lightest-weight pipeline that still lets acquisition decisions reflect real downstream outcomes.
A standing weekly view of spend, qualification, and the early downstream signals available by channel and campaign, plus a deeper periodic review that reconciles against business or clinical outcomes. Reporting should use the terms your operation already uses rather than forcing the business to translate an ad-platform dashboard.
We recommend cutting it. Every channel is launched with an economic threshold agreed up front, which makes that call a documented decision rather than an argument. We would rather concentrate budget in the channels that work than defend a broad media mix for its own sake.
Our core strength is performance marketing — paid social, search, and programmatic — combined with qualification and downstream measurement. Our current specialty positioning includes clinical-trial recruitment and virtual care. The model travels across therapeutic areas because the discipline is the same: buy on unit economics, screen hard, and optimize to the outcome that actually funds the program.
Yes, and we plan for it from the first test rather than discovering it later. Creative concepts are drafted to fit the language and materials your IRB or ethics-review process requires, submissions are batched so approval is not a per-asset bottleneck, and the test matrix is built to still be readable within the set of variants you are permitted to run.
Next step
Already running paid search?
Share the search-term report and the geographies you can actually serve — provider coverage or active-site catchments. The gap between where the spend goes and where patients can actually be served is usually visible within an hour.