TL;DR
Save the exact wrong answer, verify the correct business fact and inspect the sources before editing anything. Prioritize errors that could misdirect someone. Correct the public information you control, request third-party corrections where appropriate, and recheck without promising an immediate platform-wide fix.
Capture the error precisely
“We are invisible to AI” and “the assistant sent someone to our former office” are different problems. The second can become a concrete correction ticket.
Record the question, platform, mode, date, relevant response and cited URLs. Include whether the conversation already mentioned your practice. Identify the inaccurate sentence and the verified replacement fact. Avoid patient details or private staff information in test questions and screenshots.
If the response has no citation, record “source unknown.” A plausible explanation is not proof that a particular directory caused the error.
Triage by the consequence
Use an internal priority system that reflects the actual visitor problem:
| Error | First response |
|---|---|
| Wrong office, phone or booking destination | Verify current details and correct controlled pages promptly |
| Provider or service incorrectly described as available | Have operations confirm the facts and affected pages |
| Outdated summary with a correct next step | Review the source and schedule a proportionate correction |
| Unsupported opinion or missing recommendation | Record separately; do not treat preference as a factual error |
The practice should set its own response expectations. This table is an editorial triage aid, not a clinical urgency scale or a promise that external systems will update on that schedule.
Trace and correct the public record
Open the cited sources. Compare the website, booking destination, relevant profiles and older pages still available online. Ask the operational owner to approve the corrected fact before changing multiple surfaces.
For Google Business Profile information you manage, use its official editing workflow and inspect the result. Google’s profile-editing guide identifies the fields and process and says Google reviews changes before updating the live profile. Editing a profile does not establish that an unrelated AI answer has changed.
Work one correction ticket through to closure
Use this ticket for a verified error. Fill each field from the actual observation and authorized business record; leave missing evidence explicitly unresolved:
| Ticket field | Evidence to enter |
|---|---|
| Observed error | Exact inaccurate wording, saved question, context and dated answer |
| Approved replacement | Correct public fact and the operational owner who verified it |
| Controlled source | Affected URL, agreed edit, implementer and public verification result |
| External source | Publisher, correction request, receipt and observed public status |
| Source verification | Which controlled pages are correct and which sources remain unresolved |
| Answer recheck | Original question repeated under the recorded method; retain the actual result |
| Next action | Responsible person, outstanding dependency and next review date |
If controlled sources are correct while an external source and the observed answer remain wrong, record those states separately. Assign external follow-up and an answer recheck. Reopen website work when evidence identifies another controlled-page defect; do not call the whole incident resolved just because the website edit is complete.
If all inspected sources are correct but the answer remains wrong, retain that uncertainty. Use an available platform feedback route, keep current arrival information easy to find and schedule a proportionate recheck. Do not invent an unseen source or keep changing accurate copy solely to obtain a favorable response.
Do not promise a response time for corrections controlled by an outside publisher.
Close the loop with two separate checks
First, verify the source repair: the approved fact appears on the public page, linked destinations work and relevant structured data agrees. This is an outcome your team can directly inspect.
Second, repeat the original observation under a documented method. Save both corrected and still-incorrect answers. A single improved response is encouraging evidence, not proof that every future answer or user context will be correct.
The correction ticket should retain the original error, approved fact, source owner, completed edits, unresolved third-party requests and recheck result. That history prevents the team from repeatedly investigating the same issue without learning what changed.
Frequently asked questions
Should we publish hidden instructions telling AI what to say?
No. Publish accurate, useful information for visitors. Instructions demanding a favorable answer do not correct the underlying business record.
What if the answer recommends a competitor instead?
Distinguish a factual error from an unfavorable selection. Record the observation, but do not manufacture claims or demand a correction merely because your practice was not chosen.