GEO for Healthcare and Law Firms (YMYL): Become a Trusted Source

In health and law, being cited by AI depends on provable trust: educational content signed by an identified professional, reviewed, dated, backed by official sources and free of promises about results. On top of that, professional regulators limit what you can publish. No tactic guarantees a citation. For the big picture, see SEO, AEO and GEO: what is the difference.

Quick summary

• Health and law are YMYL topics ("Your Money or Your Life"): Google applies a higher quality standard and says trust is the most important aspect of E-E-A-T.
• AI-generated content needs manual fact-checking; on YMYL topics, the reviewer should be the licensed professional.
• Brazil's CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 and OAB Provision 205/2021 allow informational content but forbid promising results, and both have their own identification rules.
• A clear entity (who the professional is, license number, address) helps people and systems know whose information it is.
• If you are unsure about a piece, consult your professional regulator before publishing.

About the Brazilian rules. The CFM (Conselho Federal de Medicina, the Brazilian Federal Council of Medicine) and the OAB (Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, the Brazilian Bar Association) are Brazil's professional regulators for physicians and lawyers. We use their rules as a worked example because they are specific and public. They apply to professionals in Brazil. Rules in other countries differ, so check your own medical board or bar association before copying any of the limits below.

Notice. This text is not legal advice or compliance consulting, and it covers only medicine and law: dentists, psychologists and other professions have their own councils and rules, which we have not verified here.

How to read this. If you are a physician or lawyer and do not know SEO, read the sections on rules and authorship: they list what to change on your site this week. If you are an SEO professional serving these clients, go to the tables, the schema and the edge cases. Terms like YMYL and E-E-A-T are in the SEO, AEO and GEO glossary.

Why do health and law demand more from AI and Google?

Because mistakes on these topics can harm someone's health, finances or rights. Google calls these topics YMYL and, in its helpful content guide, says trust is the most important aspect of E-E-A-T and that health, finance and safety topics get stricter evaluation. The quality rater guidelines ask for a very high quality standard on these subjects.

It is not known how each assistant (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude) decides what to cite on these topics. In practice, everything Google describes as a trust signal is the best bet available: clear authorship, sources, updates and reputation.

In plain English: would you accept advice about medication or a contract from a stranger with no name and no license? Search engines and AI try to ask the same question about your site.

What do the CFM and OAB rules change in your content?

They define what each profession may say, and both forbid promising results. CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 has been in force since March 11, 2024. OAB Federal Council Provision 205/2021 is dated July 15, 2021 and is on the OAB website. As of October 2026 we found no rule replacing the first; for the provision, confirm the consolidated version and any amendments with your state section.

The CFM text below comes from the CFM Medical Advertising Manual, which presents the resolution with commentary. The table summarizes; it does not replace reading the rule. In the table, CRM is the physician's regional council registration number, RQE is the specialist qualification registry number and "seccional" is the OAB's state section.

Topic	Medicine (CFM Resolution 2,336/2023)	Law (OAB Provision 205/2021)
Identification	Name, CRM number with the word MÉDICO (physician) and specialty with RQE (art. 4). On websites and blogs, these details go on the main page (art. 6). Clinics name the medical technical director (art. 5)	True and verifiable qualifications and titles (art. 4, §1). Specialty only with a certified title or recognized specialized expertise (art. 3, III)
Results	Forbids misleading advertising, which includes promising what is not delivered, and taking part in advertising that induces a guarantee of results (art. 11, IV and VI)	Forbids promising results and using concrete cases to offer services (art. 6)
Tone	No sensationalism or self-promotion; "before and after" only with educational text and a complete set of images	Purely informational, discreet and sober; forbids persuasive, self-aggrandizing or comparative expressions (art. 3)
Soliciting clients	On their own social networks, advertising may aim at building and expanding clientele (art. 8, §2)	Forbids soliciting clients and commercialization (arts. 3 and 4)
Prices	Allows publishing the price of consultations	Forbids references to fees, free services or discounts as solicitation (art. 3, I)
Responsible party	The physician; the technical director, in establishments (art. 3)	The identified individuals and managing partners (art. 1, §1)

For SEO professionals: the rules change what goes in the template. On physicians' sites, the block with name, CRM and RQE must be visible on the main page (art. 6), which also works as an entity signal. For law firms, avoid "hire now" CTAs and "results and wins" pages: the provision forbids mentioning results and decisions (art. 4, §2). A "contact the firm" button on a contact page is safer than a banner inside educational text, but the final interpretation belongs to the state section.

Note also the difference in stance: the CFM accepts, on a physician's own social networks, advertising to expand clientele as long as it is not sensationalist. The OAB treats soliciting clients as forbidden. The same blog post can be fine for a clinic and wrong for a law firm.

How do you show authorship and professional review?

Show who wrote it, who reviewed it, with which license and when. Google says it strongly encourages bylines with authorship information where readers would expect to find it, and recommends explaining how the content was created, including the use of automation or AI. See the full design in E-E-A-T, authorship and trust for AI.

1. Byline on every article: name, photo, specialty and license (CRM and RQE; OAB number and state section, or the equivalent in your country).
2. Dated review: "Reviewed by [name, license] on [date]". If the law or protocol changes, update the article and change the date.
3. Linked official sources: the health ministry, the health regulator (Anvisa, in Brazil), medical societies, legislation and case law. Say where each data point comes from.
4. Scope notice: educational content does not replace a consultation or individual legal advice.
5. Team page with the training and license of each professional, linked to the author of each article.
6. Corrections policy: a channel for pointing out errors and a log of changes.

If you use AI to draft, Google's guidance on AI-generated content says manually checking the facts before publishing is critical. In YMYL, that means review by the licensed professional, not just by a copy editor.

What content can AI cite without you promising anything?

Educational content that answers real questions, with clear limits. That includes "what is", "when to see a professional", "what to expect from the appointment", "how the process works", glossaries and comparisons of options without recommending one as the best. Structure each section with the direct answer first, as in FAQs that AI cites.

Hypothetical example: a fictional dermatology clinic publishes "Sunscreen: How to Choose and When to Reapply". The page opens with the answer in two sentences, includes a table of filter types with indications and limitations, cites official sources and medical societies, is signed by a dermatologist with license and specialty number visible, shows the date of the last review and ends with a notice that evaluation is individual. There are no patient photos and no phrases like "guaranteed result". Contact details sit on their own page.

Two technical cautions. First, Google stopped showing the FAQ rich result in May 2026 (Search Central changelog), so use questions and answers as a text structure, not as a showcase tactic. Second, for a local business, reinforce the entity with a Google profile and consistent data: see GEO for local businesses.

How do you describe the entity and schema without overdoing it?

Use the most specific types that exist and only with true data that is visible on the page. In schema.org there are Physician and MedicalClinic for health, and Attorney and LegalService for law, plus Person for the author and Organization for the entity. The goal is to remove ambiguity (who they are, where they work, which license), not to stand out. Details in Organization, Person and sameAs.

For SEO professionals: do not mark up the clinic's or firm's own reviews with Organization or LocalBusiness expecting stars. The review snippet guidelines make these pages ineligible when the entity controls reviews about itself, and forbid fake reviews or incentivized reviews without disclosure. On the CFM side, patient praise reposted by the physician counts as the physician's own publication (art. 8, §3).

In plain English: schema is the machine-readable badge. It says "this is Dr. so-and-so, license number such-and-such", but it does not replace the real person behind it.

Which mistakes should you avoid in YMYL content?

Mistake	Why to avoid it
Testimonials and client or patient cases in the service offer	Conflicts with the bans on results and concrete cases
Promises ("cure", "case won", "guaranteed result")	Forbidden by the CFM and the OAB; AI may also repeat them as if they were facts
AI text with no professional review	Google asks for manual checking; in YMYL the mistake costs more
"Best in town"	Comparison and self-aggrandizement are forbidden to lawyers (art. 3, IV) and clash with the sober tone asked of physicians
Paying to appear in rankings and awards	The provision forbids it (art. 5, §1)
Contact details that differ between site and profiles	Weakens the entity and confuses people and systems

When an article by a professional runs in a newspaper or portal (digital PR), remember that art. 10 of the CFM resolution asks the physician to speak as a representative of medicine, without publishing an address or phone number in the text and declaring conflicts of interest. See how this connects to backlinks for clinics and law firms.

How do you measure and fix what AI says about you?

Periodically ask questions about your name, your clinic's or firm's name and the topics you work on, and check whether the description is correct. Record the result of several runs, because answers vary. When something is wrong, fix it at the source: your site, your Google profile and official directories. Contentor's AI Visibility tracks, for the questions you choose, whether ChatGPT cites the brand (only ChatGPT).

Frequently asked questions

Can I use patient or client testimonials on my site?

It depends on the profession and the content. For physicians in Brazil, the resolution allows reposting praise, as long as it is sober and promises no result, and treats it as the physician's own publication. For lawyers, the provision forbids using concrete cases and mentioning results when offering services. Confirm with your regulator before publishing.

Can I use AI to write health or legal articles?

You can, as a draft, never as the final version without review. Google says manually checking the facts of AI-generated content is critical. In health and law, the review should be done by someone with the professional license, and the page should show who reviewed it and when.

Do I need to show a medical license or bar number on my site?

For physicians in Brazil, yes: the CFM resolution requires name, CRM with the word MÉDICO and specialty with RQE, and says that on websites and blogs these details go on the main page. For lawyers, the provision allows identifying qualifications and titles as long as they are true and verifiable. In both cases, the license also reinforces trust. Other countries have their own requirements.

Will AI recommend my clinic or firm?

Nobody controls that. What is within your reach is being a clear and reliable source: authorship, official sources, consistent contact details and useful content. Whether an assistant recommends you depends on factors companies do not publish, and answers change with every query.

Can I buy backlinks for a clinic or law firm?

Links bought to manipulate ranking violate Google's policies, and the OAB provision forbids fraudulent means of boosting visibility. Prefer editorial mentions and links from portals and industry bodies. Read backlinks for clinics and law firms before hiring anything.

Next step

Start with authorship: pick five articles that already get visits, add a byline with license, review date and official sources, and consult your regulator if you doubt any sentence. Then move on to Organization, Person and sameAs schema to reinforce the entity.

Read also:

• E-E-A-T, authorship and trust for AI
• GEO for local businesses
• FAQs that AI cites