Healthcare and life sciences
Medical devices
Equipment and consumables used in care.
Device companies are shortlisted by people who never search for a device company. A surgeon compares stent types. A centre owner works out what an MRI suite costs to run. A purchase head checks which standards a dressing must meet. Engines answer all three now, and the specification takes shape in that answer, well before anyone is asked to quote.
Where the answer is being lost
The specification is drafted before your sales team hears about it.
Ask an engine "What quality standards apply to medical consumables in India" and it will name ISO 13485, CDSCO registration and sterility validation. It will not name a manufacturer that meets them. The same holds when a radiology head asks what a scanner costs to run, or a surgeon compares stent platforms. Buyers arrive at the tender with the criteria already fixed by an answer you had no part in. That is how a purchase head ends up scoring on price alone, and how a hospital's device choice follows margin rather than clinical outcome.
How we win this
The programme for medical devices
Answer the specifying question
Before a vendor list exists there is a criteria list, and it comes from questions like running cost per study, analyser throughput, or which standard a sterile item must meet. answer-pages and blogs give each of those a full written answer, with the workings shown, so the engine has something to quote and the criteria carry your assumptions.
Make the paperwork legible
Regulatory approvals decide who is even eligible here, and they usually sit in a PDF. schema turns them into entities: the CDSCO licence, the ISO 13485 scope, the manufacturing site, the notified body, the product family and its variants. A model checking whether you qualify can then read the answer instead of inferring it from a brochure.
Two buyers, two artefacts
A surgeon and a hospital CFO ask different things about the same product. One wants the trial data and the deployment detail. The other wants cost per use, service uptime and how the price cap changes the maths. We write both, and keep them separate, because a page that tries to satisfy both is quoted for neither. Where a third reader is the patient, that gets its own artefact again, written under a different rule entirely.
Where content stops working
None of this shortens a tender. Consumables are bought on price and certificate, imaging on a relationship a decade old. What content does is decide whether you are on the longlist when the committee drafts its specification, and whether the incumbent's renewal gets questioned. We pitch that job at its real size, and monitoring tells you whether you hold it.
The mix that carries it
Content
Answer and comparison pages
Cost, process, eligibility and comparison pages built for direct extraction, not for a reader who scrolls.
Foundation
Entity and schema engineering
Structured data and entity definition so engines know exactly what you are, where you operate, and what you are credible in.
Content
GEO blogs and authority content
The definitive written answer to the questions your buyers put to an engine, structured so it can be lifted and attributed.
Authority
Digital public outreach
Earned mentions, trade coverage and third-party citations — the corroboration a model checks before it names you.
Measurement
AI Presence tracking
Standing measurement of inclusion, share of answer and competitor movement as models update.
The constraint we work inside
Device marketing in India sits under price control, the NMC advertising rules, and the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. The Act is the hard limit and it is the one most agencies have never read. Advertising treatment to the public for the conditions it specifies is a criminal offence, and it applies to whoever publishes, so the liability sits with the manufacturer and not only with the clinician. That is why the patient-facing material we write is education on the condition and the procedure, never promotion of your device. On the clinical side, outcome and superiority claims are out no matter how much evidence stands behind them. Evidence does not convert a claim into a publishable one. What is publishable is the trial itself: the endpoints, the follow-up, the limits, set down as fact for a clinical audience, never a statement that one device performs better. Patient testimonials and success stories are prohibited even with written consent, and asking for reviews or ratings is prohibited too. That narrows what we publish. It also happens to be the form an engine quotes most readily.
Specialisations
4 total
The pitch is different for each one, because the buyer, the trigger and the rules on what may be published are different for each one. Open the one that is yours.
A cardiologist planning a case, and the patient's family reading up the night before, both ask what separates a drug eluting stent from a bare metal one. Neither answer was written by anyone who makes the device.
The question deciding this today
“What is the difference between drug eluting and bare metal stents”
- Who they sell to
- Surgeons and hospitals placing devices inside the body
- Who signs
- The surgeon, and the hospital procurement head
- What starts it
- Procedure planning, price cap change, technology upgrade, tender
- Cost of staying invisible
- Device choice driven by margin rather than outcome
Type "What is the difference between drug eluting and bare metal stents" into any engine and you get a competent, sourced explanation of polymer coating, restenosis and dual antiplatelet duration. It is assembled from cardiology society material and hospital patient-education pages. No manufacturer appears. So when a procurement head builds a comparison sheet at price cap parity, or a surgeon weighs a newer platform against the one he has used for years, neither is working from anything you published.
What we would run
- 01Answer and comparison pages
A platform page written to the evidence for the clinical reader: stent type, strut thickness, polymer, trial names, endpoints and follow-up, DAPT duration, and the case profiles each suits, with the limits of each trial stated. A page on what the price cap does and does not cover. And, for the family reading the night before, a separate page on the condition and the procedure, with no product argument in it.
The trial evidence is the question the surgeon and the procurement head actually ask, and it is the one artefact hospitals forward internally. The patient page is written under the harder rule, which is why it stays on the condition and the procedure. Keeping the two apart is what makes both of them publishable.
- 02GEO blogs and authority content
Long-form pieces on the questions a cath lab argues about: bifurcation lesions, calcified vessels, when intravascular imaging changes the choice, what the two-year follow-up on a newer scaffold reported and what it did not. Written with your clinical affairs team, credited to them.
Surgeons read at the level of the lesion, not the brand. Content pitched at that level is what an engine cites when a clinical question gets specific, and reporting what a follow-up found is a statement of fact rather than a claim about performance.
- 03Entity and schema engineering
Each device defined as an entity: regulatory clearance, UDI, sizes, indications, contraindications, the trials it appears in, and the named clinician or medical affairs lead who reviewed the page.
Clinical statements are only quotable if a model can see who stands behind them and under what approval. Unattributed device copy gets skipped at exactly this moment.
- 04Video and YouTube
Short procedural and handling films with a consultant: deployment technique, sizing decisions, what he does differently in a difficult anatomy. Transcribed and published as text alongside, so the words are retrievable, not just the footage.
Advertising rules stop you claiming a device handles better. They do not stop a consultant showing a deployment and describing his own technique in a calcified vessel. Filmed technique is the one place that argument survives the restriction, and the written version of it gives a model something to quote.
- 05Digital public outreach
Bylined commentary and data in cardiology trade press and hospital procurement media, on price cap revisions, import dependence, and registry follow-up. Placed as authorship, not as a product announcement.
Engines weight third-party medical and trade sources heavily on device questions. A citation there carries your position into answers your own site cannot reach.
What we would not recommend
- Reviews and testimonials. A patient's account of how a stent felt is an outcome claim for a prescription device, published to the public. Written consent does not cure it, and soliciting the account in the first place is separately prohibited. The evidence that carries weight here is registry follow-up, and that belongs on the platform page.
- Instagram. Procedure and outcome imagery for an implanted device, put in front of a public feed, is the thing the 1954 Act makes an offence. Engagement is not a defence, and the liability lands on you rather than on the surgeon in the frame.
- Quora. The person asking there usually has a date for the procedure already and no say in which device is opened. Answering them means promoting a prescription device to a patient in public, which is where the Act stops reading as a guideline and starts reading as an offence.
What a lead looks like
An interventional cardiologist at a mid-size cardiac centre, who has read your platform page and watched the deployment film, writes to ask which sizes are stocked in his region and whether your team can proctor two cases. Procurement is copied. The conversation opens on evidence and supply, not on the cap price.
What we measure
- Named in stent comparison answers
- Clinician attribution visible on every claim
- Consultant enquiries citing a specific page
- Bylined cardiology commentary cited in answers
What changes
Enquiries arrive later in the process and better informed. A radiology head, having worked through your siting model, asks what her referral mix supports before she writes the capital request. An interventional cardiologist asks for the evidence summary behind a platform before a case. A purchase head calls to check your sterility validation against a draft specification, before the tender is published rather than after. Those conversations start at qualification, not at discount.
Start here
See who gets named in medical devices today
We put your buyers' real questions to the live models and come back with the businesses they name, the sources behind those answers, and the gap between that list and yours.