NMC Advertising Guidelines 2026: What You Can Still Say

They apply to websites too. The definition of advertising in Section 3.1.2 expressly includes websites and online healthcare platforms, alongside print, social media, sponsored posts, influencer campaigns and other digital communication.

A hospital cannot assume that content is permissible simply because it appears on its own website rather than in a paid advertisement. The nature and purpose of the communication matter.

Yes, subject to the restrictions. Section 9.2 permits a factual directory of doctors containing their names, recognised qualifications, specialities, registration details and relevant professional information. It must not become a vehicle for self-advertisement or promotional publicity.

A factual doctor directory is different from a page that describes a practitioner as the city’s leading specialist or uses patient testimonials to attract appointments.

Health education remains permissible, but the context matters. Sections 5.1 and 8.2 allow public-health education and certain educational communications, provided they do not promote an individual practice or solicit patients.

A blog explaining the symptoms of diabetes, for example, serves an educational purpose. The same article could raise concerns if it becomes a disguised sales pitch for a particular doctor or encourages unnecessary tests or treatment.

Yes, within the permitted scope of public-health education. Section 8.2 allows doctors to deliver lectures and talks on public health and diseases in their own name and designation, without promoting their employer. The notice also requires electronic media posts by doctors to display specified professional identification details under Section 3.1, Explanation III.

The focus should remain on the condition, evidence, prevention or treatment information, rather than on the doctor’s superiority, achievements or ability to guarantee results.

Yes, through factual, objective and verifiable institutional communication. Section 8.3 expressly permits information about departments, facilities, equipment, services, emergency services, accreditation and charges, subject to applicable law.

A hospital can communicate that it offers MRI services or has opened a new cardiology department. It should not turn that announcement into an unsupported claim that it offers the best cardiac care in the country.

Not as an unsupported promotional claim. Section 8.1(ix) restricts comparative claims such as best, top, number one and most trusted. It provides a qualification for rankings or awards supported by independently verifiable methodology, relevant independent verification and a transparent, ascertainable basis, where otherwise legally permissible.

The important distinction is between an unsubstantiated superlative and a properly substantiated recognition that satisfies the stated conditions.

Be particularly careful with outcome claims and patient numbers. Section 8.1(iii) prohibits claims such as guaranteed cures and 100% success. Section 8.3 also restricts guarantees of treatment outcomes and unverifiable claims.

A hospital should not assume that a success-rate claim becomes acceptable merely because it has a number attached to it. Any proposed use of procedure volumes or other clinical metrics should be checked against the exact provisions and context before publication.

Not for prohibited promotional purposes. Section 8.1(v) restricts promotional case stories, testimonials, success stories and before-and-after photographs, subject to the specified scientific or educational exception. Section 6.2 says patient consent alone does not make a prohibited promotional use permissible.

A hospital should therefore reassess patient-story videos, testimonial carousels, recovery photographs and case studies used to generate appointments.

An educational discussion of a medical condition is not the same as using an individual patient’s experience to sell a service.

A promotional review-generation campaign raises a compliance concern. Section 8.1(xii) prohibits procuring or manipulating reviews, ratings and other engagement to create a misleading impression of professional standing. Section 8.1(xi) also restricts patient testimonials and endorsements used to promote services.

The notice does not expressly state that every unsolicited patient review is unlawful. However, clinics should not assume that asking patients to endorse a doctor or improve a star rating is permissible. Buying reviews, fabricating ratings and manipulating engagement are clearly problematic.

The channel itself is not the only issue. The notice covers sponsored posts, digital campaigns and search-engine communication. Whether a campaign is permissible depends on its content, purpose and compliance with the relevant restrictions.

Factual institutional information must still meet the conditions in Section 8.3. Campaigns built around prohibited patient solicitation, unsupported superiority claims, guaranteed outcomes or inducements can raise compliance concerns.

The notice does not provide a blanket approval for all paid search advertising, nor does it expressly ban every paid campaign irrespective of its content.

Offers designed to stimulate unnecessary medical care are restricted. Section 8.1(x) prohibits discounts, limited-period offers, coupons, cashback, referral benefits, free procedures and similar inducements where they are likely to encourage unnecessary medical consultation, diagnostic investigation or treatment.

This is particularly relevant to seasonal health-check campaigns and promotional treatment packages. A marketer should assess the nature of the offer and its likely effect rather than assume that a discount is acceptable because it is a common retail marketing practice.

Outsourcing does not remove responsibility, and AI use faces specific restrictions. Section 4.4 says third-party communication does not absolve a practitioner or institution of responsibility for content it authorised, sponsored, adopted or knowingly permitted. Section 8.1(viii) restricts agency and platform arrangements linked to procuring or referring individual patients. Section 7.2 prohibits AI-generated promotional campaigns intended to further commercial interests and prohibits synthetic patient endorsements or manipulated patient images, testimonials, voices and clinical outcomes.

The notice does not establish a blanket ban on every AI tool or every agency engagement. But the proposed use, content and commercial arrangement must be examined against the relevant clauses.