What to Do If the Assistant Gives Wrong Information About a Clinic

Four Types of Error

The assistant’s mistakes about a clinic fall into four groups: 🔍

Type 1 — Old information

A departed practitioner, an old address, old hours, an old fee. The commonest type — and the source is almost always an un-updated directory or review. The assistant assumes old information is current.

Type 2 — Title error

Calling a psychologist a psychiatrist, a clinical psychologist a therapist. In this vertical the most dangerous type: a regulatory problem and a match to the wrong question. Its source: title inconsistency across surfaces: the identity article.

Type 3 — Confusion

Mixing you up with a similarly named clinic or a practitioner of the same name. Its source: different spellings of the clinic name or missing distinguishing information (district, practitioner name).

Type 4 — Fabrication

A service that doesn’t exist, an area you don’t work in, a promise never made. The rarest; but when it happens, the most damaging. Its source is usually blurry narrative: the assistant guesses a service list from “psychology centre”.

The Correction Sequence

Four steps when an error is seen: 🔧

Step 1 — Find the source

Ask the assistant “where did you get this information?”; most assistants show the source. If not, open the six surfaces and look for where the wrong information sits — usually a directory, an old review or a forgotten page.

Step 2 — Fix or remove the source

An update request if it’s a directory, a correction if it’s your own page, a reply with current information if it’s an old review. If a source can’t be removed, write the same information correctly on stronger surfaces (profile, site, schema) — the assistant believes the consistent majority: the compilation article.

Step 3 — Strengthen the distinguishing information

For confusion: district and practitioner name next to the clinic name, complete on every surface. For fabrication: the sentence “we don’t do this” on the site and profile — the boundary sentence narrows the assistant’s guessing space: the content article.

Step 4 — Ask again a month later

The correction isn’t reflected immediately in the assistant; it changes when the source is re-read. Ask the same question at the next assistant round and record it. If it hasn’t corrected after two rounds, there’s another source.

👉 You don’t argue with the assistant; you fix the source and wait.

The Prevention Routine

Cheaper than correcting is preventing: 🛡️

A departed practitioner: same day, six surfaces

The number-one source of wrong information in this vertical. When a practitioner leaves, they’re removed the same day from the site, profile, directories, schema, social accounts and booking system. A week’s delay means months of wrong description: the maintenance article.

The “clinic name” question in the monthly round

One of the five fixed questions is already this: how the assistant describes the clinic is recorded every month. The error is usually caught here, in its first month: the round article.

Boundaries instead of blurry narrative

Phrases like “all kinds of psychological support” push the assistant to guess. Areas worked in as an explicit list, areas not worked in as one sentence — the antidote to fabrication.

The directory diet

The number of registered directories should be small and keepable-current. Every directory entry opened years ago and forgotten is an old-information source for the assistant. Once a year: which directories are we in, are they all current.

And wrong information isn’t permanent

A last note: assistant answers follow the source. When the source is fixed the answer is fixed — sometimes in one month, sometimes three. Not panic but sequence is needed. To inherit it built, owned and district-locked: the parcel model.

Frequently Asked Questions