IDENTITY DENTAL MARKETING / ANONYMOUS CASE STUDY
January-June 2026 | Companion evidence document available separately 1 GENERAL DENTAL PRACTICE | JANUARY-JUNE 2026 Organic Search Results A Competitive Suburban Market Outside Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 39,488 search impressions.
232 organic clicks.
$2,390/month average Google Ads spend.
For a general dental practice serving a suburban market outside the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, organic visibility was present in every monthly period reviewed. Identity Dental Marketing's evidence review documented 39,488 Google Search impressions and 232 organic search clicks from January through June 2026. [Proof, pp. 2, 4-6] Verified highlight What it means 39,488 organic search impressions Appearances in Google Search results across the six selected months.
232 organic search clicks Clicks from organic Google Search results, separate from paid advertising.
40 organic clicks in June vs. 33 in January 21.2% higher for the two selected monthly periods. Results fluctuated between them.
$14,338.45 total Google Ads spend $2,389.74 monthly average across January-June. Ad spend excludes service fees.
Google Ads spend is separate from the organic search figures; no organic result is attributed to paid advertising. The total and average were calculated from six monthly account views. [Proof, p. 1] The work behind the visibility The inspected account scope included website management, SEO with blogging and backlinking, and Google Ads optimization. A live practice article was independently opened and its April 1, 2026 publication date checked. The evidence companion includes the service selections and the public work reference. [Proof, p. 2] Five-star client testimonial “Their expertise in Google SEO and digital marketing has helped improve our online visibility and bring more attention to our practice.” Practice owner | Five-star public review | October 6, 2026. Exact excerpt; identity withheld. Original review, stars, date and public source are preserved in the private proof document. [Proof, p. 8] The client's name, practice name, city and identifying source links are withheld in this anonymous version. The separate proof document contains the original evidence and should be shared only when identification is intended.
IDENTITY DENTAL MARKETING / ANONYMOUS CASE STUDY
January-June 2026 | Companion evidence document available separately 2
PERFORMANCE AND VERIFICATION
A transparent view of the organic results Month Organic impressions Organic clicks January 5,086 33 February 4,689 34 March 8,765 48 April 8,916 37 May 6,752 40 June 5,280 40
TOTAL
39,488 232 Consistent presence, with monthly variation Organic search generated 33-48 clicks each month. June's 40 clicks exceeded January's 33, while the strongest month for clicks was March at 48. These figures demonstrate recorded visibility and search engagement; they do not establish uninterrupted growth or new-patient counts. [Proof, pp. 2, 4-6] Competitive setting Approximately 500 dentistry listings appeared within the directory's 10-mile search around the practice location. The address-based Healthgrades search returned 512 listings on October 14, 2026. This indicates substantial nearby provider presence. It is a directory estimate, not an audited count of unique active dentists or a January-June census.
The dated screenshot, full source URL and search method appear in the private proof document. [Proof, p. 7] How the results were verified Using authorized view access to Identity Dental Marketing's account management system, the reviewer matched the client account, selected the January-June monthly ranges, and transcribed the organic impressions and clicks. The Google Search Console integration identified the practice's website as the linked property, displayed site-owner permission, and showed recent synchronization and stored data. [Proof, p. 3] The evidence companion preserves the monthly reporting screenshots, connection screenshot, service selections, dated public article reference, and original review screenshot and source. Organic search figures come from imported Search Console reporting; they are not GA4 visitor counts. [Proof, pp. 1-6] Evidence notes References to “Proof” point to the eight-page companion evidence document prepared for this case study. The account system imports and tracks data; raw API responses were not independently audited. January is included as the selected January 1-31 period, with daily completeness not independently established. Impressions are search appearances; clicks are not unique visitors or confirmed patients. The later testimonial is not a measurement of the January-June period.