Patient engagement software: AI search visibility ranking (2026)
How AI search engines rank patient engagement software by visibility and citations. 20 brands measured monthly across Google AI Mode: which brands the AI names in answers, which domains it cites as sources, and how the leaders compare. Healthcare engagement platforms used to automate reminders, capture intake, support telehealth, collect feedback, and improve patient communication and retention. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Download this ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
When asking AI engines about patient engagement software, OhMD emerges as a leader with a citation percentage of 62.5. Other notable brands include Phreesia and Curogram. These brands are frequently mentioned, indicating strong visibility among AI-generated responses.
The rankings depend heavily on citations from top sources. YouTube, emitrr.com, and ohmd.com are prominent, indicating a mix of media platforms, niche websites, and company websites driving visibility. This dependency on varied sources influences which brands are highlighted by AI engines.
For buyers considering our rankings, the emphasis AI engines place on recent reviews and third-party validations can be crucial. Prioritize brands with strong presence across top-cited domains and those showing authority in specific subcategories of patient engagement. This approach ensures a well-rounded evaluation.
At a glance
What we observed in this category
OhMD leads the patient engagement software category with a composite score of 18.8 and a citation rate of 62.5%, which is more than double the second-ranked brands Phreesia and Curogram, both sitting at 37.5% citation and 11.2 composite. This gap is significant because it shows OhMD is being referenced by Google AI Mode in roughly two out of every three relevant queries, while the majority of the 20 tracked brands score zero across all metrics. The category average citation rate of just 8.1% underlines how concentrated AI recognition is at the very top.
A notable divergence exists between visibility and citation across all five ranked brands: every brand, including OhMD at rank 1, records 0.0% visibility while still accumulating meaningful citation percentages. This means brands are being cited as sources or references within AI-generated answers without being surfaced as named recommendations in response preambles. OhMD's own domain appears in the top cited sources list, confirming it earns citation credit through its own content, yet its named visibility score has fallen 25 percentage points from the previous period.
The top cited sources in this category are anchored heavily on third-party and niche sites: youtube.com and emitrr.com appear ahead of most brand domains, and diabetesjournals.org signals that AI is drawing on clinical or academic content alongside vendor material. Only ohmd.com and curogram.com from the tracked brands appear in the cited sources list directly. This suggests Google AI Mode is blending vendor-owned content with independent review and clinical sources when constructing answers in this category.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility fallers
-
OhMD 25% → 0% · rank #1 → #1-25pp
-
Klara 25% → 0% · rank #2 → #6-25pp
-
Phreesia 12% → 0% · rank #3 → #2-12pp
The ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
ohmd.com
|
0% | 62% | Google AI Mode |
OhMD holds a citation rate of 62.5%, more than five times the 8.1% category average, and its own domain appears in the top cited sources list, but its visibility has dropped 25 points to zero. |
||||
| 2 |
phreesia.com
|
0% | 38% | Google AI Mode |
Phreesia sits at 37.5% citation, nearly five times the category average, but lost 12.5 points of visibility this period while its citation rate actually improved by 12.5 points. |
||||
| 3 |
curogram.com
|
0% | 38% | Google AI Mode |
Curogram matches Phreesia at 37.5% citation and 11.2 composite score, and its domain appears in the top cited sources list, giving it direct content-level recognition alongside peer brands. |
||||
| 4 |
artera.io
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Artera records a citation rate of 12.5%, in line with category average, but trails the top three by a margin of 25 percentage points or more, with a composite score of just 3.8. |
||||
| 5 |
nexhealth.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
NexHealth shares Artera's 12.5% citation rate and 3.8 composite score exactly, and neither brand's domain appears in the top cited sources list, limiting their content-level AI footprint. |
||||
| 6 |
klara.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
getweave.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
relatient.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
solutionreach.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
lumahealth.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
podium.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
demandforce.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
doctible.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
updox.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
sprucehealth.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
patientpop.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
yosi.health
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
healow.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
petal-health.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
bridgepatientportal.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on patient engagement software, these are the domains Google AI Mode cited most often. If you're not on this list — or if your competitors are — that's a concrete PR / linkbuilding target.
How to read this ranking
Four things worth knowing before you act on the numbers above. These are the same definitions across every industry page — for category-specific observations, see the What we observed section above (where available) and the per-brand insights inline in the ranking.
Visibility = being named
A brand's visibility % is the share of AI answers that mention it by name in the response prose. This is who AI engines actively recommend to the buyer. More on visibility →
Citation rate = being trusted
Citation rate is the share of AI answers that include the brand's domain as a clickable source link. This is what the AI treats as authoritative evidence, different from being named. More on citation rate →
Top engine differs by brand
The "top engine" column shows which AI surface each brand performs best on. Big gaps between a brand's score across engines usually points to specific content or schema gaps. How AI engines pick sources →
Rankings move month to month
AI engines re-crawl and re-rank on shorter cycles than classical search. We re-audit every brand on this list at least every 30 days and refresh this page automatically. How AI search ranking works →
Get your own patient engagement software brand audited
The brands above were curated from public market-leader lists. Want the same measurement against your own brand — including the queries you appear on, which competitors get named instead, and a prioritised fix list? Run a free preview.
Frequently asked about patient engagement software AI visibility
Who leads AI visibility in patient engagement software?
OhMD leads with a composite score of 18.8 and a citation rate of 62.5%, well ahead of second-ranked Phreesia and Curogram, which both score 11.2. Every brand records 0.0% named visibility in the current period.
What sources does Google AI Mode cite most for patient engagement software research?
The top cited sources are youtube.com, emitrr.com, and diabetesjournals.org, followed by ohmd.com and curogram.com as the only tracked brand domains to appear in the cited sources list.
Why do brands have citation scores but zero visibility in this category?
All 20 tracked brands record 0.0% visibility, meaning none are being surfaced as named recommendations in AI response preambles, yet brands like OhMD still earn citation credit when their content is referenced within answers.
How concentrated is AI recognition in the patient engagement software category?
Recognition is heavily concentrated: the top three brands hold citation rates between 37.5% and 62.5%, while 15 of the 20 tracked brands score zero on both visibility and citation.
Which brands have lost the most AI visibility recently in this category?
OhMD and Klara both lost 25 percentage points of visibility to reach zero, while Klara also dropped four rank positions from second to sixth. Phreesia lost 12.5 points of visibility but partially offset this with a 12.5-point gain in citation.
Does Google AI Mode rely on vendor-owned content or third-party sources in this category?
The cited sources list includes a mix of both: third-party platforms like youtube.com and emitrr.com, a clinical journal (diabetesjournals.org), and vendor domains ohmd.com and curogram.com, indicating AI blends multiple source types.