AEO for patient intake software: AI search visibility ranking
How AI search engines rank patient intake software by visibility and citations. 20 brands measured quarterly across Google AI Mode: which brands the AI names in answers, which domains it cites as sources, and how the leaders compare. Patient intake software used to collect forms, insurance details, consents, history, and pre-visit information before appointments. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Download this AEO ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
When buyers inquire about Patient intake software, AI engines consistently highlight IntakeQ as the leader in this category. This software not only tops the list but holds a 25.0% visibility in AI-generated recommendations. Not far behind, Curogram and Phreesia also receive notable mentions, making them significant contenders among the 20 brands evaluated.
The rankings are shaped largely by sources highly regarded by AI engines. Prominent domains include ohmd.com, getperspective.ai, and pabau.com, often cited for their reviews and insights. Many of these are aggregator or review sites, which reflect a broad consensus informed by user feedback and thorough analyses.
For a buyer, these rankings underscore the value AI engines place on recent reviews and third-party validation. When selecting from this list, consider the software's topical authority and how well it aligns with specific patient intake needs. AI engines favor current and comprehensive assessments, so prioritize brands with strong visibility in these authoritative sources.
At a glance
What we observed in this category
IntakeQ leads the patient intake software category with a composite score of 25.0, matching both its visibility and citation percentages exactly, and rising from rank 13 to rank 1 in the current audit period. The category average visibility sits at just 5.0 percent, meaning IntakeQ's 25.0 percent visibility is five times the average. That gap is significant because it suggests Google AI Mode is consolidating answers around a single brand rather than distributing recognition evenly across the 20 brands tracked.
Curogram presents the most striking divergence between visibility and citation in this category. Its visibility score is 0.0 percent, yet its citation rate reaches 75.0 percent, the highest citation figure of any brand in the audit. This means Google AI Mode is actively referencing Curogram as a source or trusted reference without surfacing it prominently as a named solution, a pattern that separates 'cited as evidence' from 'recommended as a product.' Phreesia shows a similar but smaller gap, with 12.5 percent visibility against 25.0 percent citation.
Google AI Mode is the top engine for every brand in this dataset, indicating the audit captured no meaningful signal from competing AI surfaces. Among the top cited third-party sources, ohmd.com, getperspective.ai, pabau.com, and g2.com appear alongside brand domains like curogram.com and zentake.com. The presence of review aggregators such as g2.com alongside niche health-tech content sites like gistia.com and doctorconnect.net suggests Google AI Mode is anchoring its patient intake responses on a mix of category-specific editorial content and user review platforms.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
IntakeQ 0% → 25% · rank #13 → #1+25pp
-
Phreesia 0% → 12% · rank #8 → #3+12pp
-
Tebra 0% → 12% · rank #19 → #4+12pp
Biggest visibility fallers
-
Mend 38% → 12% · rank #1 → #7-25pp
-
eClinicalWorks 12% → 0% · rank #4 → #11-12pp
The AEO ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
intakeq.com
|
25% | 25% | Google AI Mode |
IntakeQ holds a composite score of 25.0, five times the 5.0 percent category average visibility, after jumping 12 positions from rank 13 in the previous audit period. |
||||
| 2 |
curogram.com
|
0% | 75% | Google AI Mode |
Curogram's citation rate of 75.0 percent is the highest in the category yet its visibility is 0.0 percent, making it the clearest example of a cited source that is not a named recommendation. |
||||
| 3 |
phreesia.com
|
12% | 25% | Google AI Mode |
Phreesia climbed five ranks to third with a citation rate of 25.0 percent that doubles its 12.5 percent visibility score, mirroring Curogram's pattern at a smaller scale. |
||||
| 4 |
tebra.com
|
12% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Tebra rose 15 positions from rank 19 to rank 4, with visibility and citation both at 12.5 percent, up from 0.0 percent on both metrics in the previous period. |
||||
| 5 |
nexhealth.com
|
12% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
NexHealth sits at rank 5 with visibility and citation both at 12.5 percent, matching Tebra's composite score of 12.5 and showing no divergence between named and cited presence. |
||||
| 6 |
drchrono.com
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
mend.com
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
simplepractice.com
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
jotform.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
lumahealth.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
eclinicalworks.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
athenahealth.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
doctible.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
patientpop.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
acuityscheduling.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
solutionreach.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
updox.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
carepatron.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
rectanglehealth.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
yosi.health
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on patient intake 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 AEO 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 →
AEO 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 90 days and refresh this page automatically. How AI search ranking works →
Run an AEO audit on your own patient intake software brand
The brands above were curated from public market-leader lists. Want the same answer engine optimisation 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 AEO for patient intake software
Who leads AI visibility in patient intake software?
IntakeQ leads with a composite score of 25.0 and a visibility rate of 25.0 percent, which is five times the category average of 5.0 percent. It rose from rank 13 to rank 1 in the most recent audit period.
Which patient intake software brand is most cited by Google AI Mode without being widely named as a recommendation?
Curogram has a citation rate of 75.0 percent but a visibility rate of 0.0 percent, making it the brand most referenced by AI as a source while rarely appearing as a named product suggestion.
What third-party sources does Google AI Mode anchor on for patient intake software queries?
The top cited sources include ohmd.com, getperspective.ai, pabau.com, g2.com, doctorconnect.net, zentake.com, and gistia.com, alongside the brand domain curogram.com.
Which patient intake software brands have seen the biggest drop in AI visibility recently?
Mend fell from rank 1 to rank 7 with a visibility drop of 25.0 percentage points, and eClinicalWorks dropped from rank 4 to rank 11 with a visibility delta of negative 12.5 percent.
How concentrated is AI visibility in the patient intake software category?
Visibility is highly concentrated, with the category average at 5.0 percent and the leader IntakeQ at 25.0 percent, while 10 of the 20 tracked brands show a composite score below 9.0.
Does citation rate reliably predict overall AI visibility rank in this category?
Not always. Curogram ranks second overall despite zero visibility, driven entirely by a 75.0 percent citation rate, which shows citation and visibility can diverge sharply within this category.