Looking for live web examples of Medical schema
-
Has anyone seen a hospital system or medical clinic properly employ schema markup to their sites? This seems like very new territory, and we want to do it right by our client. Are there any best practices I need to look out for?
-
@mloniero Thanks for sharing your research! This is so helpful!
-
I know that this is super late, but since I came here to try to find live website examples that have schema markup I thought that I would share what I found:
- https://www.henryford.com/services/cardiology/vascular
- https://www.sharp.com/services/heart/surgical-nonsurgical-vascular-procedures.cfm
- https://modernvascular.com/peripheral-artery-disease/
I hope that somebody else finds these examples useful.
-
Hi,
If you're new to this the best place to go would be https://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html this will help explain the markup used along with examples.
Thanks
Darren
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Unsolved MozBar says no schema.org markup when it exists and validates elsewhere
I have added schema.org markup to many pages on my site (e.g https://discoverquotes.com/wisdom/) - since it is a quote site I marked up all the quotations - it validates with schema.org - but when I use MozBar and look at Page Analysis-->Markup the moz bar says I have no schema.org markup. Is this something Moz only updates periodically? If so, anyone know how often they update? or any ideas why moz bar is reporting a false negative?
Moz Bar | | daviddq0 -
Schema Markup Warning "Missing field "url" (optional)"
Hello Moz Team, I hope everyone is doing well & good, I need bit help regarding Schema Markup, I am facing issue in my schema markup specifically with my blog posts, In my majority of the posts I find error "Missing field "url" (optional)"
Technical SEO | | JoeySolicitor
As this schema is generated by Yoast plugin, I haven't applied any custom steps. Recently I published a post https://dailycontributors.com/kisscartoon-alternatives-and-complete-review/ and I tested it at two platforms of schema test 1, Validator.Schema.org
2. Search.google.com/test/rich-results So the validator generate results as follows and shows no error
Schema without error.PNG It shows no error But where as Schema with error.PNG in search central results it gives me a warning "Missing field "url" (optional)". So is this really be going to issue for my ranking ? Please help thanks!6 -
Introduce customer reviews and ratings onto our product pages
Hi, I'm looking to introduce historical customer reviews onto our product pages but i want an opinion on whether a product page that's indexed will jump from 0 reviews to possible 30+, what if any problems that could arise from this.. For a bit of background, we've been collecting customer reviews/ratings since 2015 on our internal system. I'm only looking to start using feedback from 2020 onwards. The current set up is that the product page will display the latest 30 reviews, on the same page is a link that will take the user to another page where they can review all the customer feedback. I'm using Google Schema to markup the text to ensure it is firstly understood by google and displays correctly too. So back to my original question. Will an e-commerce product page that currently has no customer reviews that is indexed, been seen differently if when the next time it's crawled its found to have, say 30+ reviews? Are there any implications this way? What's your experience? I look forward to reading your feedback.
Technical SEO | | Train4Academy.co.uk
Thanks0 -
Ecommerce web design read more toggle vs menu link on home page and product pages
Hello, We have an Ecommerce store. We have a lot of content on the home page and product pages and we are going back and forth between which one to use between a toggle "Read More" "Show Less" toggle for each section and a anchor linked menu. We have long product pages We're thinking a read more toggle is more appropriate for category descriptions so that they can go at the top of the category and not take up space. But the read more toggle with lots of content scrolls the page down and doesn't scroll it back up when you hit "show less" We're leaning towards a linked menu for the home pages and product pages for this reason, but an accordion type set of toggles would look nicer. What do you recommend, and how have you set up your read more toggles if they have lots of info so that they are not confusing? Are there other options? ' Not looking for code (I can do that) I'm looking for ideas on the cleanest home page, category pages, and product pages when they have tons and tons of textual content. Wanting to trim it up and make it look compact and neat! Thanks!
Web Design | | BobGW0 -
Https pages indexed but all web pages are http - please can you offer some help?
Dear Moz Community, Please could you see what you think and offer some definite steps or advice.. I contacted the host provider and his initial thought was that WordPress was causing the https problem ?: eg when an https version of a page is called, things like videos and media don't always show up. A SSL certificate that is attached to a website, can allow pages to load over https. The host said that there is no active configured SSL it's just waiting as part of the hosting package just in case, but I found that the SSL certificate is still showing up during a crawl.It's important to eliminate the https problem before external backlinks link to any of the unwanted https pages that are currently indexed. Luckily I haven't started any intense backlinking work yet, and any links I have posted in search land have all been http version.I checked a few more url's to see if it’s necessary to create a permanent redirect from https to http. For example, I tried requesting domain.co.uk using the https:// and the https:// page loaded instead of redirecting automatically to http prefix version. I know that if I am automatically redirected to the http:// version of the page, then that is the way it should be. Search engines and visitors will stay on the http version of the site and not get lost anywhere in https. This also helps to eliminate duplicate content and to preserve link juice. What are your thoughts regarding that?As I understand it, most server configurations should redirect by default when https isn’t configured, and from my experience I’ve seen cases where pages requested via https return the default server page, a 404 error, or duplicate content. So I'm confused as to where to take this.One suggestion would be to disable all https since there is no need to have any traces to SSL when the site is even crawled ?. I don't want to enable https in the htaccess only to then create a https to http rewrite rule; https shouldn't even be a crawlable function of the site at all.RewriteEngine OnRewriteCond %{HTTPS} offor to disable the SSL completely for now until it becomes a necessity for the website.I would really welcome your thoughts as I'm really stuck as to what to do for the best, short term and long term.Kind Regards
Web Design | | SEOguy10 -
Web Design and Development Leads
Friends, Even though we get organic leads related to Web Design and Development we are looking for other sources to buy real time leads related to Web Design and Development. Any pointers are much appreciated. Thank you
Web Design | | INN
Chris0 -
Comparing the site structure/design of my live site to my new design
Hi SEOmoz team, for the last few months I've been working on a new design for my website, the old, live design can be viewed at http://www.concerthotels.com - it is primarily focused on helping users find hotels close to concert venues throughout North America. The old structure was built in such a way that each concert venue had a number of different pages associated with it (all connected via tabs) - a page with information about the venue, a page with nearby hotels to the venue, a page of upcoming events, a page of venue reviews. An example of these pages can be seen at: http://www.concerthotels.com/venue/madison-square-garden/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-events/madison-square-garden-events/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-reviews/madison-square-garden-reviews/304484 The /venue-hotels/ pages are the most important pages on my website - and there is one of these pages for each concert venue - they are the landing pages for about 90% of the traffic on the website. I decided that having four pages for each venue was probably a poor design, since many of the pages ended up having little or no useful, unique content. So my new design attempts to bring a lot of the venue information together into fewer pages. My new website redesign is temporarily situated at: (not currently launched to the public) http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend The equivalent pages for Madison Square Garden are now: http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue/madison-square-garden/304484 (the page above contains venue information, events and reviews) and http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484 I would really appreciate any feedback from you guys, based on what you think of the new site design compared to the old design from an SEO point of view. Of course, any feedback on site speed, easy of use etc compared to the old design would also be greatly appreciated. 🙂 My main fear is that when I launch the new design (the new URLs will be identical to the old ones), Google will take a dislike to it - I currently receive a large percentage of my traffic through Google organic search, so I don't want to launch a design that might damage that traffic. My gut instinct tells me that Google should prefer the new design - vastly reduced number of pages, each page now contains more unique content, and it's very much designed for users, so I'm hoping bounce rate, conversion etc will improve too. But my gut has been wrong in the past! 🙂 But I'd love to hear your thoughts, and thanks in advance for any feedback, Cheers Mike
Web Design | | mjk260 -
Footer Links For Web Design Agencies - Bad?
So today Google have updated their Webmaster Guidelines and they have drawn particular attention to their update relating to Link Schemes. http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66356 Unless you have had your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears since February then most people are aware of the types of link schemes that the updated is refering to but there is one area that isn't so black and white for me. "Here are a few common examples of unnatural links that violate our guidelines: Widely distributed links in the footers of various sites" We are a design agency and we design and build lots of websites for our clients. It is pretty standard practice for agencies to add a credit to the footer of websites and we pick up a lot of work from people that see a site that they like and click through the footer link to our site. Our footer credit is standard on all of the websites that we create:- Website by Teapot Creative Only the 'Teapot Creative' part of the credit is anchor text so we are only linking using our brand name with no intention of manipulating search results. Is this going to hurt us? or will the fact that we are only linking using our branded term and without any SEO intent keep us in the clear? Thanks.
Web Design | | AdeLewis
Ade.0