This version restores every social media planning number from the Continental Draft and presents them as a full content, design, capture, publishing and growth system.
The draft does not describe a weak hospital brand. It describes a trusted hospital whose channels are not yet turning attention into consistent action.
About 42K followers across five channels for a 500 bed hospital with 151 doctors.
The largest social audience is currently on the channel that brings in the fewest patients.
Instagram has 221 posts but only 759 followers, showing a low return on publishing effort.
The channel is essentially inactive even though it remains linked from the website.
The follower mix itself shows why channel roles need to be redesigned instead of duplicating the same content everywhere.
| Channel | Current audience | Draft observation |
|---|---|---|
| 21,302 | Largest audience, but not being used enough for leadership, medical firsts, partnerships and jobs | |
| 15,000 | Strong reach at 88 percent, but weak connection to service pages and booking | |
| YouTube | 5,800 | 215 videos are not organised around patient questions, titles, thumbnails, chapters and links |
| 759 | 221 posts but weak follower growth, with too much poster reuse instead of Reels, guides and doctor faces | |
| X | 48 | No clear role. The draft proposes using it only for major news, media and monitoring |
The draft explicitly says action readiness is the lowest score on all five channels. Search connection is also weak where most patients are.
| Channel | Trust | Action | Search or reach signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| 82 percent | 52 percent | Reach 88 percent, search connection 58 percent | |
| Not stated in draft | 44 percent | Search connection 48 percent | |
| YouTube | 84 percent | 56 percent | Search support 81 percent |
| 92 percent | 50 percent | Largest audience, but weak patient acquisition role | |
| X | Not stated in draft | 20 percent | No defined channel job |
Posts follow a calendar rather than the chain of patient question, doctor answer, proof, search and action.
The draft calls out poster style content and weak opening lines.
One strong idea is not being reused properly across Reels, YouTube, LinkedIn, search and PR.
Watch time, saves, real replies and clicks to care information are not being measured clearly.
The audit covers only 29 July to 27 August and does not sample channels evenly. Facebook has 8 views while YouTube and X have only 2 each.
The audit does not show these measures for any channel.
Evercare, Asgar Ali and Square are named as competitors but are not compared in social performance.
The current audit does not include TikTok at all.
The United to Continental transition is not covered in the social section even though old United signals remain in search and listings.
The draft lists both brand impact and business impact. They are preserved here because the social service is meant to connect content with the wider growth system.
Preserve old search memory rather than losing it, including searches such as United Hospital Limited Road No 71 Dhaka.
Bring search, maps and directories into one brand so the existing 2,155 reviewers find one clear institution instead of two.
The current follower mix shows that all five channels should not be doing the same thing.
15,000 plus heart surgeries, 98 percent heart surgery success, 250,821 dialysis sessions and JCI accreditation can be turned into credible public stories.
The draft baseline is an AI visibility score of 19 with 8 mentions and 9 cited pages.
The wider plan references 666 site issues across 267 pages, including 258 broken links, 113 thin pages and 33 duplicate titles.
Action readiness is weak across every social channel, so the plan needs a clear patient next step.
The current rating is 3.8 with 2,155 reviews, leaving room to improve the comparison against competitors.
Dr Momenuzzaman alone brings 131 visits a month while Continental has 151 specialists with little structured discovery.
The draft starts from 369 keywords and 5,939 monthly visits, with traffic up 44.9 percent and keywords up 59.1 percent.
Corporate health packages and medical travel are named as future growth lines in the plan.
The screenshot table is not pasted here. Its data is rebuilt as a native table so the client can read it clearly.
Each row below is taken from the planning table in the Draft.
| Content type | YouTube | X | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doctor videos | 8 | 8 | 16 | |||
| Short video, Reels and Shorts | 12 | 12 | 24 | |||
| Carousels and saveable guides | 4 | 4 | 8 | |||
| Static and doctor face posts | 4 | 4 | ||||
| Stories | 14 | 14 | ||||
| Service and clinical proof | 3 | 4 | 7 | |||
| Seasonal and awareness | 3 | 3 | ||||
| Institutional news | 2 | 2 | 8 | 12 | ||
| Total | 20 | 34 | 20 | 6 | 8 | 88 |
These are the practical monthly inputs behind the 88 item publishing plan.
| Input | Amount |
|---|---|
| Original ideas needed | 12 to 15 |
| Hospital shoot days | 2 |
| Doctors filmed | 8 |
| Items made per shoot day | About 20 |
| Published items | 88 |
The Draft contains multiple outcome tables. All of them are restored below as native design.
These are planning targets, not guaranteed outcomes.
| Channel | Now | 3 months | 6 months |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15,000 | 22,000 to 30,000 | 38,000 to 52,000 | |
| 759 | 1,800 to 2,500 | 3,500 to 5,000 | |
| YouTube | 5,800 | 7,500 to 8,800 | 10,000 to 13,000 |
| 21,302 | 23,000 to 24,000 | 26,000 to 28,000 | |
| X | 48 | 150 to 250 | 300 to 500 |
| Total following | 42,900 | 54,000 to 65,000 | 78,000 to 98,000 |
| Metric | Now | 3 months | 6 months |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly video views | Not tracked | 600K to 1.1M | 1.3M to 2.4M |
| Monthly saves and shares | Not tracked | 3,000 to 5,000 | 7,000 to 12,000 |
| Visits to website from social | Very low | 800 to 1,500 a month | 1,800 to 3,500 a month |
| Doctor videos live | 215 | 239 | 263 |
| Content published | 0 | 264 items | 528 items |
| Channel | Now | 3 months | 6 months |
|---|---|---|---|
| Very low | 700 to 1,200 a month | 1,800 to 3,200 a month | |
| YouTube | Very low | 150 to 300 | 400 to 800 |
| Very low | 100 to 200 | 300 to 600 | |
| Very low | 100 to 200 | 250 to 450 | |
| X | Almost none | 10 to 30 | 30 to 80 |
| Total from social | Very low | 1,000 to 1,800 | 2,800 to 5,100 |
These are additional visual examples that organise the source planning into service journeys without replacing any of the Draft data.
A patient question should move through a connected path rather than end at a poster.
Chest pain, heart screening or specialist question appears in social content.
A cardiologist answers through a Reel, video or simple guide.
Continental capability and credible proof are introduced.
The patient reaches a doctor page, service page or 10666.
The action is tracked as a call, enquiry or booking opportunity.
The Draft gives one asking price for the social media service. The page now explains what that price is meant to cover.
Monthly topic planning, channel allocation and editorial direction.
Graphics, simple motion, captions and content packaging.
Scheduling, posting, approvals and practical channel management.
The operating model assumes real hospital and doctor input rather than generic stock content.
Monthly performance review focused on action, not vanity metrics alone.
The social plan coordinates capture needs while dedicated production can be expanded through the separate production service.
Asking price shown in the Continental Draft for this service.
This is the formal service proposal for this specific service. It can be reviewed directly below, opened in a separate browser tab or downloaded as a PDF.
×
