ANNUAL INDUSTRY CONFERENCE
October 15–17, 2026 · Atlanta
See the conference · Get tickets
FOR SPONSORS • EXHIBITORS
October 15–17, 2026 · Atlanta
Request Prospectus • Supporters • Apply
PRACTICE DECISION TOOLS
FOR Doctors, Specialists, NPs
Calculators • Marketing • Patient Study • See all tools
RESEARCH & PROOF
National Stats, Industry Research
Research Briefs • Visuals • Legal Op • Natl Stats
Which patients are you designed FOR?
You can market to anyone. Not everyone will feel that you were built for them. See which of the four CMT Patient Study segments your positioning, archetype, and model are most likely to resonate with. Four questions, about a minute.
Your patient fit, in three parts: the hero, the problem, the guide.
This test follows the StoryBrand framework. You are the hero of this tool, and CMT is your guide.
You, the physician
You have clarified what you are FOR and how you lead. Now you want to know who will feel it.
The problem
Externally: inquiries arrive from a mix of patient types, and each one is listening for something different.
Internally: you may worry about turning people away, or about attracting people who will not be a good fit.
Philosophically: no practice is right for every patient[1]. Saying so honestly is good for patients too.
Your guide
The CMT Patient Study describes four segments of patients who searched for a concierge doctor[7]. This tool maps your answers to them, and we are plain about where the data ends and CMT’s editorial judgment begins.
Confirm four things
Your positioning, archetype, target patient, and model. Pre-filled if you took Tests 1 and 2.
See your alignment profile
How strongly each of the four segments is likely to resonate with you, and why.
Test it
Check the prediction against your last 20 inquiries, then track new patients for a year.
What is at stake
Without this check, your marketing may speak to a segment that is not the one most likely to choose you, and your patient mix may surprise you.
What success looks like
You know which patients you most likely resonate with, what they respond to, how to reach them respectfully, and how to test the prediction with your own intake data.
Our agreement with you
We promise to be plain about what this test is, what it is built on, and where it stops.
Disclaimers, please read before you start
This is a directional model based on the CMT Patient Study, built from Concierge Medicine Today’s own patient-inquiry survey, 2013 to 2024[7]. It describes which patient segments your answers are most likely to resonate with. It is not a guarantee, and your actual patient mix may differ based on referral patterns, geography, marketing, and your local healthcare landscape. Your answers are self-reported and not independently verified.
What to do with this. Treat your results as a starting conversation, not a conclusion. Before changing your marketing, pricing, insurance participation, or business structure based on any CMT tool, consult a qualified professional, such as a healthcare attorney, a CPA or financial advisor, or a practice management consultant, who can evaluate your specific situation, your local market, and your actual patient data. This tool does not know your practice, your patients, your finances, your contracts, or your regulatory environment.
Not advice. Nothing here is medical, legal, financial, accounting, or tax advice. Content is educational and informational only.
Independence. CMT is an independent publication and reports on the full range of practice models. This tool does not favor concierge, hybrid, direct primary care, or traditional models, and it is not a vendor product.
Privacy. Your answers are processed in your browser and are not sent to CMT by this page. If you took Tests 1 or 2 on this device, this page reads the results saved in this browser’s local storage to pre-fill your answers. You can remove them with the “Clear saved results” button, or by clearing your browser data.
Frameworks and credits. The framing here adapts published work by other authors, cited under Sources. That use is CMT’s own independent adaptation and does not imply endorsement by those authors or their organizations.
Assumption of risk and limitation of liability. This tool is provided “as is,” for general informational and self-assessment purposes only, without warranties of any kind, express or implied, including as to its accuracy, completeness, or fitness for a particular purpose. By using it, you acknowledge that any decisions you make, and any actions you take or do not take, based on its output are entirely your own, and you assume all risk associated with that use. Concierge Medicine Today, LLC, its owners, employees, and affiliates disclaim all liability for any loss, damage, or claim, direct or indirect, arising from or related to your use of this tool or reliance on its results.
© 2007–2026 Concierge Medicine Today, LLC. All rights reserved.
Methodology: how alignment is calculated, and what it does not mean
What this test does. Your four answers award points to the four Patient Study segments. Your alignment for each segment is its share of all points awarded, rounded to the nearest percent. Because of rounding, the four numbers may not add to exactly 100.
DataWhere the segments come from
The CMT Patient Study[7][8] is a four-segment model built from patients who searched for a concierge doctor through CMT between January 2013 and December 2024. The segments sit on two axes: how a patient feels about their current doctor, and whether they want insurance or Medicare to keep working. The four-segment model uses the 561 patients who answered all four rating questions, which were added in 2018. The shares (29%, 27%, 27%, 16%) are shares of those 561 respondents, not of the general population or your market. Respondents were a self-selected CMT audience, and CMT states that the Patient Study has not been reviewed by outside researchers.
EditorialHow points are awarded
| Your answer | Points awarded |
|---|---|
| Positioning: speed | Level-Uppers +30, Fresh-Starters +10 |
| Positioning: continuity | Coverage Keepers +30, Level-Uppers +5 |
| Positioning: fresh start | Fresh-Starters +30, Careful Movers +5 |
| Positioning: pragmatic | Careful Movers +30, Fresh-Starters +5 |
| Archetype | Matching segment +25 (Optimizer to Level-Uppers, Guardian to Coverage Keepers, Disruptor to Fresh-Starters, Pragmatist to Careful Movers) |
| Target patient | Matching segment +20 |
| Model: independent | Level-Uppers +10, Fresh-Starters +10 |
| Model: hybrid | Coverage Keepers +15, Careful Movers +10 |
The model question follows the data: in the Patient Study, Level-Uppers and Fresh-Starters rated the importance of insurance low (2.21 and 2.34 out of 5), while Coverage Keepers and Careful Movers rated it high (4.67 and 4.64). The point values themselves are CMT editorial judgment. They were not fitted to patient outcome data and have not been statistically validated.
For a data-weighted estimate, CMT’s Patient Match Score[9] takes a different approach: it places your practice on the two Patient Study axes and measures how close you are to each segment.
What the percentages mean, and do not mean
An alignment of 40% for a segment does not mean 40% of your patients will belong to it. It means your answers line up more closely with what that segment tends to look for than with the others. The comparison bars beside the study mix are for context only. The study mix is not a forecast of your market.
Segmentation and story framing
Segmentation rests on the idea that markets are made of groups with different needs, first set out for marketers by Wendell Smith in 1956[1]. That is a reason to think about who you are designed for, not evidence that any segment is better to serve. The story structure follows Donald Miller’s StoryBrand framework[2], which casts the customer as the hero and the brand as the guide. Here you are the hero and CMT is the guide. Inside your practice, your patient is the hero and you are the guide.
Insurance and billing context
Coverage Keepers and Careful Movers place high importance on insurance or Medicare continuing to work. Serving them may raise billing and compliance questions. In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that federal concern about concierge care included whether membership fees might be additional charges for services Medicare already pays for[3]. That report is more than twenty years old and rules have since changed, so confirm current requirements with a qualified healthcare attorney.
What the independent research does and does not say
A systematic review found that higher continuity of doctor care was associated with lower mortality in 18 of 22 studies[4], and a meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials found that the patient-clinician relationship had a small but statistically significant effect on healthcare outcomes[6]. Hall and colleagues offer a formal model of patient trust in physicians[5]. None of these studies tested this tool or these segments, and the continuity studies are observational.
Limits
- Answers are self-reported, and the tool cannot see your actual patient mix.
- Four questions produce a directional profile, not a measurement.
- The best test is your own intake data. See “What to do with this” in your results.
Tell us about your practice
Four questions. If you took Tests 1 or 2 on this device, we pre-fill what we can, and you can change any answer.
Who you are designed FOR
Sources and further reading
Third-party sources
- Smith, W. R. (1956). Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing, 21(1), 3–8.Used for: the origin of the market segmentation concept, that markets are made of groups with different needs.
- Miller, D. (2017). Building a StoryBrand: Clarify Your Message So Customers Will Listen. HarperCollins Leadership. ISBN 9780718033323.Used for: the seven-part story structure (character, problem, guide, plan, call to action, failure, success).
- U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2005, August 12). Physician Services: Concierge Care Characteristics and Considerations for Medicare (GAO-05-929). gao.gov/products/gao-05-929Used for: historical context on federal concern about membership fees and Medicare. Published in 2005, so it does not reflect current rules.
- Pereira Gray, D. J., Sidaway-Lee, K., White, E., Thorne, A., & Evans, P. H. (2018). Continuity of care with doctors: a matter of life and death? A systematic review of continuity of care and mortality. BMJ Open, 8(6), e021161. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021161. Read the articleUsed for: 18 of 22 studies reported statistically significant lower mortality with higher continuity. Observational studies, so association, not cause.
- Hall, M. A., Dugan, E., Zheng, B., & Mishra, A. K. (2001). Trust in physicians and medical institutions: what is it, can it be measured, and does it matter? The Milbank Quarterly, 79(4), 613–639. doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00223. PubMed recordUsed for: a formal definition and conceptual model of patient trust in physicians.
- Kelley, J. M., Kraft-Todd, G., Schapira, L., Kossowsky, J., & Riess, H. (2014). The influence of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e94207. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094207Used for: 13 randomized trials; overall effect small (d = 0.11) but statistically significant. The authors call for more research.
CMT first-party research (not independently peer reviewed)
- Concierge Medicine Today, LLC. The CMT Patient Study. Data collected 2013–2024; compiled and published 2025–2026. conciergemedicinetoday.net/cmt-patient-studyUsed for: the four segments, their shares (n = 561, 2018 to 2024), and segment averages. Self-selected CMT audience, not a national sample.
- Concierge Medicine Today, LLC. The CMT Patient Study: full published research article. conciergemedicinetoday.net/cmt-patient-study-article
- Concierge Medicine Today, LLC. Patient Match Score. conciergemedicinetoday.net/patient-match-scoreUsed for: the data-weighted alternative to this test’s editorial point values.
Bibliographic details verified September 21, 2026. Links open the publisher, journal, government, or CMT page. Books are identified by ISBN.
WHAT THE ASSESSMENT COVERS:
01
Your readiness profile→
Financial, operational, and personal factors that determine fit
02
Market fit indicators→
Whether your patient panel and geography support this model
03
Honest risk factors→
What makes transitions fail — and whether those apply to you
04
Your next step→
A clear recommendation based on your answers — not a generic guide
CMT has covered this field independently since 2007. We've talked to thousands of physicians who've made this decision — in both directions.
“This assessment was built from nearly two decades of physician interviews, national conference conversations, and independent research. It doesn't tell you what to do. It gives you the framework to decide for yourself — clearly, honestly, without a vendor agenda.”
— Michael Tetreault, Editor-in-Chief · Concierge Medicine Today · Est. 2007 · Independent since day one
This assessment is useful if — and honest if it's not.
Good fit
Physicians actively considering a transition
Physicians 1–5 years from making a move
Residents exploring career paths
Physicians wanting an independent view
Not the right fit
Physicians who've already decided and are in execution mode
Those seeking legal or financial advice
Practices already operating in this model
Most physicians land here for one of these reasons:
You're exhausted by the current model but not sure if this is the answer or just an escape.
You've read about it but can't find an honest, vendor-neutral take on whether it fits your situation.
You're worried about the transition — financially, relationally, professionally.
You want someone to tell you clearly: yes, or no for now, but not forever, or no, it’s just not for you.