Which campaigns produced the patients your claims collected on?

A group running primary care, orthopaedics, dermatology and a surgical line has four different patient acquisition problems, four different economics and usually one budget. Reported together they produce a cost per new patient that describes none of them.

Carrying department or service line through the export splits the report the way the group is actually managed. It is usually the first cut a practice administrator asks for and the one that changes a budget conversation.

Two patients with identical visits and different insurance collect different amounts. Since payer mix correlates with how a patient found you — a self-pay aesthetic enquiry is a different acquisition from a referred medical visit — ranking channels on charges produces a systematically distorted table.

Exporting collections fixes it and makes the report reconcile to the group's own financials. That reconciliation is what lets the number survive being questioned by somebody who owns the P&L.

Between a visit and settled money sit the claim, the adjudication, the patient balance and sometimes an appeal. Months, routinely. Any attribution method that needs the revenue to land inside a window is structurally wrong here.

Matching on the patient means the lag is irrelevant. The person who enquired in February and the encounter that collected in July are one match, and the February campaign is credited with the July money.

The match reads a contact detail, an amount and a date. No diagnoses, no procedure detail beyond an optional service line, no notes. There is no tag on any page, no connected application and no permission to grant — the input is a report export.

Data is encrypted in transit and at rest, isolated per workspace and deletable in one click, with a DPA available. Which rules apply to your organisation is your determination to make with your own advisers; we do not see your records.

A meaningful share of specialty volume arrives by physician referral, which costs no media spend and a great deal of relationship time. It is almost always left out of marketing reporting entirely, which makes the paid channels look more important than they are.

Upload the referring provider list as a source file and it is ranked on collected revenue beside paid search. For a group weighing a liaison hire against an advertising increase, that comparison is the decision, and it has usually never been quantified.

It also surfaces referral relationships that have quietly decayed, which is a different kind of useful.