Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Salem, OR
Live figures from 80 indexable audited Salem dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 20, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
73
median score
+1.00 vs Oregon median 72
71.90
average score
Oregon average: 69.38
83
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
80
websites audited
of 1,433 across Oregon
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Salem
Counts use all 80 indexable audited Salem websites.
A
2.50%
2 of 80
B
31.25%
25 of 80
C
26.25%
21 of 80
D
21.25%
17 of 80
F
18.75%
15 of 80
Oregon distribution: A 3% · B 26% · C 28% · D 20% · F 23% (1,433 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Salem dental websites fall short
“Not detected” means a signal was absent from the homepage and up to two linked pages in a bounded crawl; it does not prove the signal is absent everywhere on the site. Every percentage shows its own evaluated base; checks evaluated on fewer than 30 Salem websites are omitted.
95%
FAQPage structured data not detected
76 of 80 evaluated Salem websites — vs 95.88% across Oregon.
90%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
72 of 80 evaluated Salem websites — vs 95.32% across Oregon.
89%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
71 of 80 evaluated Salem websites — vs 93.02% across Oregon.
| Check | Salem rate | Oregon rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 65.00%52 of 80 evaluated | 73.27%1,050 of 1,433 evaluated | −8.27 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 48.75%39 of 80 evaluated | 56.94%816 of 1,433 evaluated | −8.19 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 45.00%36 of 80 evaluated | 52.83%757 of 1,433 evaluated | −7.83 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 73.75%59 of 80 evaluated | 66.85%958 of 1,433 evaluated | +6.90 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 62.50%50 of 80 evaluated | 69.23%992 of 1,433 evaluated | −6.73 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 65.00%52 of 80 evaluated | 71.39%1,023 of 1,433 evaluated | −6.39 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 63.75%51 of 80 evaluated | 57.78%828 of 1,433 evaluated | +5.97 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 27.50%22 of 80 evaluated | 33.15%475 of 1,433 evaluated | −5.65 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 90.00%72 of 80 evaluated | 95.32%1,366 of 1,433 evaluated | −5.32 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 32.50%26 of 80 evaluated | 36.92%529 of 1,433 evaluated | −4.42 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 88.75%71 of 80 evaluated | 93.02%1,333 of 1,433 evaluated | −4.27 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 40.00%32 of 80 evaluated | 42.57%610 of 1,433 evaluated | −2.57 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 52.50%42 of 80 evaluated | 54.71%784 of 1,433 evaluated | −2.21 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 68.75%55 of 80 evaluated | 66.92%959 of 1,433 evaluated | +1.83 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 40.00%32 of 80 evaluated | 41.73%598 of 1,433 evaluated | −1.73 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 95.00%76 of 80 evaluated | 95.88%1,374 of 1,433 evaluated | −0.88 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 53.75%43 of 80 evaluated | 52.97%759 of 1,433 evaluated | +0.78 pp |
2026 US study baseline
The frozen national picture for the same checks
Rates from the 50,405-website 2026 US study cohort — a frozen study base that counts every audited domain, so it is a different denominator than the live evaluated figures above and the two must not be read as one series.
Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detected38.72%
Insurance or payment page not detected51.40%
Clear booking action not detected42.35%
Missing meta descriptions33.36%
Emergency-services page not detected58.40%
FAQ page not detected65.47%
Unclear H1 structure53.80%
Missing canonical tags26.14%
Limited useful content32.11%
Contact or inquiry form not detected68.70%
FAQPage structured data not detected95.57%
Images missing alternative text74.25%
XML sitemap not detected24.75%
BreadcrumbList structured data not detected63.60%
AggregateRating structured data not detected91.06%
Service or treatment structured data not detected91.90%
Privacy-policy link not detected42.09%
Explore the Salem market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Salem
- How good are dental practice websites in Salem?
- Across 80 audited Salem dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 73 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 83 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Salem dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Salem dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (95% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (90% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (89% of evaluated sites). “Not detected” is a bounded-crawl observation, not proof a signal is absent everywhere on a site.
- How does dental website quality in Salem compare with the rest of Oregon?
- Salem's median score of 73 is 1 point above the Oregon-wide median of 72, based on 1,433 audited websites across Oregon.
- How can I check my own dental practice website's SEO?
- Run a free DentalPresence score: it audits a practice website against the same 37 checks behind every figure on this page and returns a prioritized list of what to fix first. No card is required.
Methodology and limitations
How these live figures are computed
Live cohort. Figures cover the indexable audited practice websites currently published for Salem in the DentalPresence index and recompute as sites are re-audited, so they will drift from the frozen 2026 study numbers over time. Each check's percentage uses only the websites where that check was actually evaluated, shown as its base.
Scoring. Methodology dps-37-v1: a bounded HTTP crawl of robots.txt, sitemap signals, the homepage, and up to two linked internal pages, scored across 37 deterministic checks. “Not detected” is a limited observation, not proof of absence.
What is excluded. Crawl-accessibility findings (DNS failures, blocked crawls, timeouts) come from the frozen study run and use a different cohort base, so they are not restated here — see the Oregon benchmark for them. Percentages are withheld wherever fewer than 30 websites form the base.
No clinical claims. Website signals only — not a clinical rating. These figures do not use rankings, traffic, conversions, credentials, or patient outcomes, and a failed check is not proof of lost revenue or poor care.
Use the benchmark
Score a dental website against the same framework
The Salem figures describe a market, not an individual practice. Run a free score to inspect the public website signals detected for one practice — the same 37-check framework behind every number on this page.