Eating Disorder Treatment Centers: AI Market Discovery Index

Tracking how AI platforms recommend eating disorder treatment centers. This public AI Market Discovery Index is updated monthly since July 2026.

By Mark Huntley, J.D.Growth Strategist & AI Discovery Analyst

5 minutes read

Get my free AI Company Index Download sample PDF

On this page

01Benchmark Summary
02Current Benchmark at a Glance
03Research Scope and Qualification
04Current Brand Standings
05How to Read the Standings
06Recommendation Coverage Movement
07Largest Increase: ERC Pathlight
08Category Leader: ERC Pathlight
09Recommendation Placement Snapshot
10Buyer-Intent Distribution
11Historical Measurement Record
12Evidence and Source Layer

Benchmark Summary

ERC Pathlight led the Eating Disorder Treatment Centers benchmark in September 2026 with 23.5% valid recommendation coverage, up significantly from 6.6% in July 2026. The gap to the next-closest brand, The Emily Program at 16.2%, stood at 7.3 points in September 2026.

September 2026 saw significant movement across the category. ERC Pathlight recorded the largest coverage increase, rising from 2.8% in August 2026 to 23.5% in September 2026, a move of 20.7 points. Center for Discovery also rose significantly from 0.0% in August 2026 to 5.9% in September 2026. No tracked brand recorded a significant decline in September 2026.

Within the full July-to-September series, ERC Pathlight, Center for Discovery, and Monte Nido each moved beyond normal variation. Monte Nido rose from 2.2% in July 2026 to 10.3% in September 2026. The benchmark began with 327 prompt-surface observations in September 2026 and produced 68 qualified observations after qualification.

AI recommendation trend

valid recommendation coverage, Jul 2026 to Sep 2026

ERC Pathlight23.5%
The Emily Program16.2%
Alsana10.3%
Monte Nido10.3%
Center for Discovery5.9%
Rogers Behavioral Health5.9%
The Renfrew Center5.9%
Walden Behavioral Care1.5%
Veritas Collaborative0.0%

Current Benchmark at a Glance

Measure	Jul 2026	Sep 2026	Movement
Qualified benchmark observations	91	68	Down 23
Tracked brands	9	9	No change
Qualified surface breadth	2	3	Up 1
Recommendation-shaped answer share	6.6%	7.4%	Up 0.8 pts
Valid recommendation shortlist share	6.6%	19.1%	Up 12.5 pts
Leader by valid recommendation coverage	The Emily Program	ERC Pathlight	Change

Qualified surface breadth counts the canonical AI surface families with at least one qualified observation. The six canonical families are ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode.

For the strategic interpretation of this benchmark, read CiteWorks Studio's analysis of How AI Search Is Recommending Eating Disorder Treatment Centers

Research Scope and Qualification

The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design.

Research stage	Jul 2026	Sep 2026	What it represents
Source prompt-surface observations	213	327	Total prompts collected across AI surfaces
Unique questions	209	254	Distinct questions asked
Brand / competitor mentions	213	327	Prompts mentioning a brand or competitor
Relevant observations	138	226	Prompts relevant to the vertical
Irrelevant observations	75	101	Prompts not relevant to the vertical
Qualified benchmark observations	91	68	Public denominator after qualification

Brand-level percentages use the qualified observations as the public denominator, not the raw collection. Link: AI Market Discovery Methodology.

Want the full Authority Index

The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.

Request free AI Company Index

Current Brand Standings

Brand	Presence rate	Valid recommendation coverage	Top-three rate	Rank-one rate	Net sentiment
ERC Pathlight	79.4%	23.5%	14.7%	2.9%	0.3
The Emily Program	52.9%	16.2%	5.9%	1.5%	0.3
Alsana	14.7%	10.3%	2.9%	0.0%	0.7
Monte Nido	69.1%	10.3%	2.9%	2.9%	0.1
Center for Discovery	16.2%	5.9%	0.0%	0.0%	0.4
Rogers Behavioral Health	13.2%	5.9%	0.0%	0.0%	0.4
The Renfrew Center	19.1%	5.9%	0.0%	0.0%	0.3
Walden Behavioral Care	4.4%	1.5%	0.0%	0.0%	0.3
Veritas Collaborative	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0

How to Read the Standings

Presence rate: The share of qualified observations in which the brand is mentioned at all.
Valid recommendation coverage: The share of qualified observations in which the brand receives a valid recommendation.
Top-three rate: The share of qualified observations in which the brand appears among the top three recommended options.
Rank-one rate: The share of qualified observations in which the brand is recommended first.
Net sentiment: Positive minus negative sentiment among mentions, divided by total mentions.

For formulas and denominator rules, see AI Market Discovery Metric Definitions.

Recommendation Coverage Movement

Brand	Jul 2026	Sep 2026	Movement since baseline
Alsana	4.4%	10.3%	Up 5.9 pts
Center for Discovery	0.0%	5.9%	Up 5.9 pts
ERC Pathlight	6.6%	23.5%	Up 16.9 pts
Monte Nido	2.2%	10.3%	Up 8.1 pts
Rogers Behavioral Health	2.2%	5.9%	Up 3.7 pts
The Emily Program	7.7%	16.2%	Up 8.5 pts
The Renfrew Center	1.1%	5.9%	Up 4.8 pts
Veritas Collaborative	0.0%	0.0%	No change
Walden Behavioral Care	0.0%	1.5%	Up 1.5 pts

August 2026 marked a dip for several brands before the September rise. ERC Pathlight fell from 6.6% in July 2026 to 2.8% in August 2026, then rose to 23.5% in September 2026. The Emily Program declined slightly from 7.7% in July 2026 to 7.0% in August 2026 before reaching 16.2% in September 2026.

Largest Increase: ERC Pathlight

ERC Pathlight's valid recommendation coverage rose from 6.6% in July 2026 to 23.5% in September 2026, an increase of 16.9 points beyond normal month-to-month variation. The brand's top-three rate moved from 4.4% to 14.7%, and its presence rate rose from 65.9% to 79.4%. ERC Pathlight was recommended first in 2.9% of qualified observations in September 2026, down from 4.4% in July 2026.

Category Leader: ERC Pathlight

ERC Pathlight became the category leader in September 2026 at 23.5% valid recommendation coverage, having trailed The Emily Program in July 2026 when both brands sat at lower levels. The Emily Program followed at 16.2%, while Alsana and Monte Nido tied at 10.3%. ERC Pathlight's presence rate was 79.4% in September 2026, the highest among tracked brands, while The Emily Program's presence rate was 52.9%.

Want the full Authority Index

The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.

Request free AI Company Index

Recommendation Placement Snapshot

Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. ERC Pathlight led in both coverage and top-three placement in September 2026, but several brands with similar coverage recorded different first-position rates. Alsana and Monte Nido each held 10.3% valid recommendation coverage; Monte Nido was recommended first in 2.9% of observations, while Alsana recorded 0.0%.

Brand	Sep 2026 top-three rate	Sep 2026 rank-one rate	Jul 2026 top-three rate	Jul 2026 rank-one rate
ERC Pathlight	14.7%	2.9%	4.4%	4.4%
The Emily Program	5.9%	1.5%	5.5%	2.2%
Alsana	2.9%	0.0%	1.1%	0.0%
Monte Nido	2.9%	2.9%	1.1%	0.0%

Close coverage can still hide different first-position rates.

Buyer-Intent Distribution

All qualified observations in both months fell into the Brand Recommendation class.

Buyer-intent class	Jul 2026	Sep 2026
Brand Recommendation	91	68
Pricing & Value	0	0
Multi-Brand Comparison	0	0
Total qualified observations	91	68

The current public series measures brand-recommendation discovery and does not yet contain qualified observations in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison classes.

Historical Measurement Record

This is an evergreen benchmark URL. New measurements are added to the same report.

Measurement	Qualified observations	Coverage leader	Leader coverage	Largest coverage movement
July 2026	91	The Emily Program	7.7%	ERC Pathlight, up 16.9 pts to 23.5% (September 2026)
August 2026	71	Alsana	7.0%	ERC Pathlight, up 16.9 pts to 23.5% (September 2026)
September 2026	68	ERC Pathlight	23.5%	ERC Pathlight, up 20.7 pts from August 2026

Evidence and Source Layer

The benchmark is built from prompt-level observations that retain the query, AI/search surface, answer, brand outcome, recommendation placement, sentiment, and where exposed, citations or attributable evidence sources. Source presence is evidence about the information environment. It is not automatically proof that the source caused the recommendation.

Scope Boundaries

This public benchmark does not measure market share, attributable sales, every possible AI response, organic-search ranking, social mention volume, private or sponsored channels, or causality from a metric movement alone.

About This Benchmark

The LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery Index tracks how AI assistants surface and recommend brands across canonical AI/search surface families including ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode. It is a neutral industry benchmark built from real prompt-level observations.

Get a Company-Level Authority Index

The public industry benchmark shows category-level standings. A company-level Authority Index can go deeper.

Get my free AI Company Index

Want the full Authority Index

The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.

Request free AI Company Index