Most orthodontic practices approach Google Maps the same way: collect reviews, keep the profile active, and assume that will be enough. It’s a reasonable strategy, but the data suggests it overlooks some of the factors that actually influence visibility.
A study analyzing 100 dental clinics on Google Maps in Madrid — one of the most competitive dental markets in Spain — reveals something interesting: the clinics appearing in the top 10 are not necessarily the ones with the most reviews. They are the ones with more complete and consistently managed profiles. In orthodontics, one structural factor stands out in particular.
The assumption about reviews doesn’t hold up
In dental and orthodontic marketing, it is often assumed that the more reviews a practice has on Google, the easier it is for it to appear in the top positions on Google Maps. The logic seems straightforward: more reviews signal trust, so Google should reward that with greater visibility.
But the data tells a different story.
The clinic with the highest number of reviews in the entire sample — 2,218 reviews — does not appear within the top 30 results. At the same time, a clinic with fewer than 100 reviews appears within the top 10.
Across the full sample, no consistent correlation appears between review volume and ranking position.
This doesn’t mean reviews are irrelevant. They influence patient trust and the likelihood that someone clicks once a practice appears in the results. But as a ranking factor, review volume alone appears to have limited impact.
The clinics that rank highest are not necessarily the ones with the most reviews, but the ones that manage their profiles more actively and more completely.
The structural factor many practices overlook
Google Business Profile allows practices to set one primary category and several secondary categories. Each additional category expands the range of specific searches in which a practice can appear.
When a patient searches for “orthodontist near me” or “clear aligner specialist,” Google is far more likely to show practices that have the relevant category configured in their profile.
The data from the study shows a clear difference: clinics in the top 10 have an average of 5.1 secondary categories configured, while clinics ranked 11 to 30 average 3.3.
That’s almost two additional categories, meaning two additional types of searches where those clinics may appear.
However, 27% of the clinics analyzed operate with only their primary category configured. This means more than one in four clinics limits its Google Maps visibility to a single type of search, missing many specific queries from potential patients.
What this means for orthodontic practices
Among all secondary categories analyzed, “Orthodontist” is the most common, appearing in 51% of top-10 clinic profiles.
This is not a coincidence. Orthodontic treatments are among the highest-value services in dentistry, and patients searching specifically for orthodontic care usually have clear intent and are closer to booking an appointment.
For a clinic that offers orthodontic treatment but has not configured the “Orthodontist” category, the implication is straightforward: it may not appear in the searches made by exactly the type of patient it wants to attract.
Those searches end up going to competitors who have structured their profiles more clearly.
The same logic applies to other related specialties.
“Dental implants periodontist” appears in 47% of top-10 profiles, “Cosmetic dentist” in 37%, and “Pediatric dentist” in another 37%.
Practices offering multiple treatments but listing only one category are systematically underrepresented in the searches most likely to convert into real patients.
Profile activity and ratings on Google Maps: what the data shows
Beyond ratings, the study reveals clear differences in how top-ranking clinics manage their profiles.
a) 80% of top-10 clinics respond to their reviews systematically, compared to 50% of lower-ranked clinics.
b) 50% of top-10 clinics have published at least one update in the past 30 days, compared to 19% of the lowest-visibility group.
Average ratings, by contrast, show very little difference between groups.
The average rating for top-10 clinics is 4.71, while clinics ranked 31 to 100 average 4.76 — a difference of only 0.05 points.
This suggests that profile management and recent activity show clearer differences between clinics than average ratings alone.
What this means in practice
For an orthodontic practice, reviewing the profile can start with something very simple: opening its Google Business Profile and checking a few key elements.
Configured categories
If the primary category is already “Orthodontist,” the next step is to check which secondary categories are configured alongside it. Many orthodontic practices also offer general dentistry, pediatric dentistry, or cosmetic dentistry. Each of these services can be reflected in an additional category, expanding the searches in which the clinic may appear.
Recent profile activity
When was the last update published?
Review management
Are all patient reviews being answered?
These are not complex technical tasks. They don’t require advertising budgets or hiring an agency.
What they do require is consistent attention to the signals Google appears to use when deciding which clinics to show — and which ones to leave out.
The practices capturing the most visibility on Google Maps are not necessarily the ones with the most reviews.
They are the ones whose profiles make it easier for Google to understand what services they provide — and when they should appear in search results.
About this study
José Francisco Ouvina (Frenchy), consultant specialized in Google Maps visibility and local SEO for private clinics in Spain. The study referenced in this article analyzed 100 private dental clinics in Madrid based on public Google Business Profile signals.