SMC doctors: checking the register and what the SMC code allows in advertising
The clinic has its rules. The doctor has their own—a separate code, enforced by a different body, and often stricter. It's the reason careful doctors advertise less than the law strictly requires.
Looking up a doctor?
To check whether a doctor is registered in Singapore, and see their registered qualifications and specialty, use the Singapore Medical Council’s official register. It is run by the government, not by us.
The SMC code on advertising in five points
Only within limits. A doctor can share factual information about their practice, but the SMC's code of conduct restricts advertising by the individual doctor—separately from the clinic's MOH duties. It's enforced by the Singapore Medical Council, and a breach can count as professional misconduct. On testimonials especially, it's stricter than the clinic rules.
- Information must meet twelve standards. It must be factual, accurate and verifiable, and not misleading, unduly persuasive, sensational, enticing, laudatory, comparative or disparaging, with no extravagant claims and no financial inducements. SMC ECEG (section G2)
- Doctors can state the facts about themselves. Neutral, objective information about SMC-registered qualifications, experience, areas of practice and expertise in procedures is allowed. SMC ECEG (section G2)
- No testimonials where the doctor has control, and no asking for them. Testimonials must not be used on any media where the doctor controls the content, and patients must not be asked or induced to write them. SMC ECEG (section G2)
- No “before” and “after” images, and no offers. Before-and-after (or “after”-only) images are not allowed, and nor are free or discounted treatments, time-limited offers or gifts. SMC ECEG (section G2)
- The platform does not change the rules. The same standards apply on any medium, unsolicited messages and viral social distribution are unacceptable, and paid features must be disclosed as advertising. SMC ECEG (sections G3 and G4)
Summary of the Singapore Medical Council’s Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines (2016 edition), Part G. Read the code itself before relying on any point.
What doctors can post on Google, websites and social media
The code cares about the content, not the channel. A Google Business Profile, a clinic website, an Instagram account and a press interview are all held to the same advertising standards.
- Factual practice details: services offered, clinic address, opening hours and how to book.
- The doctor’s SMC-registered qualifications, experience and areas of practice, stated neutrally.
- Educational content that explains a condition or procedure, including images or video used to educate rather than to promise a result.
- Articles, talks and interviews, provided the information is objective and meets the same standards. If the feature was paid for, say so at the start.
What changes the risk is tone and control. The more the content is about the doctor and controlled by the doctor, the more closely the code applies, so a doctor’s own social account deserves the same care as the clinic website.
What the code does not allow
These are the code’s own rules, in plain words. Each comes from section G2 of the SMC Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines.
- Testimonials on any media where the doctor controls the content, or asking patients for them.
- “Before” and “after” images, including “after”-only images, because single cases create unjustified expectations.
- Superlatives and comparisons: laudatory claims, extravagant claims, or any impression of being better than other doctors.
- Inducements: free or discounted treatment, time-limited offers, gifts or tie-ups with unrelated businesses.
- Glamour and fear: celebrity or fashion associations, or playing on fear, insecurity or body image.
Testimonials: where the code is strictest
This is the part that matters most day to day, and it's why testimonials are tighter than the clinic rules alone suggest.
"Testimonials are subjective and must not be used in advertising on any media where you have any control over the content. You must not ask or induce your patients or anyone to write positive testimonials about you in any media."
Two halves. The first is about control: if the doctor controls the channel—their own website, their clinic's social account, their profile—a testimonial there is caught. The second is a flat ban on asking for or encouraging testimonials, anywhere, in any form.
That's why a testimonial can be fine for the clinic but a problem for the doctor. The clinic rules allow a narrow set of unpaid, unedited, directly-given testimonials on the clinic's own channels. But those same channels are ones the doctor "controls" so the code can bite exactly where the clinic rule allows. MOH has said as much: its ban on paid reviews lines up with this section of the code.
Review and rating platforms: the 2020 warning
The SMC has dealt with the modern version of this head-on. In a November 2020 advisory—after a run of controversy over unverifiable reviews and doctors being profiled without their consent—it strongly warned doctors against:
- Taking part in SEO platforms that use patient reviews and ratings; and
- Buying packages from those platforms to collect testimonials.
The reasoning: doing so can be read as agreeing to use patient testimonials in advertising, which the code doesn't allow. For marketing, that's a big deal. Review-generation campaigns, reputation-management packages, and "get more 5-star reviews" services—routine in other industries—are dangerous ground for a registered doctor.
Beyond testimonials
The code's concern with advertising is wider than testimonials. It pulls in the same direction as the clinic content rules—information should be factual and checkable, not boastful, sensational, or likely to create false hope or push people to book. Where the two overlap, the safe move is to follow the stricter one. And when the doctor is the face of the clinic's content—increasingly normal for aesthetic practices—that personal exposure travels with the content.
A related SMA advisory on advertising standards for doctors says much the same. The theme throughout: the more the content is about the doctor and controlled by the doctor, the more the code governs it.
For clinics, being found online has to happen inside these rules: plain answers to the questions patients search for, written without testimonials, superlatives or promises. That is how we approach SEO for doctors.
How the SMC code sits alongside the Healthcare Services Act
- Enforced by: MOH
- Penalty: Fine up to $20,000, imprisonment up to 12 months, action on licence.
- Enforced by: SMC under Medical Registration Act
- Consequence: Professional misconduct; action on doctor's registration.
The MOH rules bind the clinic—the business. This page is about the person: the individual doctor, bound by the SMC's Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines (the "code" for short), enforced not under the clinic rules but under the Medical Registration Act, by the Singapore Medical Council.
Both apply at the same time, to the same ad, and they don't merge into one.
What the code is, and why it has teeth
The code isn't a normal law—it's the standard the SMC uses to judge a doctor's conduct. But it bites, because the Medical Registration Act lets the SMC hear complaints about how a doctor behaves professionally, and the code is the yardstick. Break it and you can face a charge of professional misconduct.
The current version was a deliberate response to change—the SMC itself pointed to the growing commercialisation of medicine and the explosion in advertising as reasons for updating it. Advertising is squarely in scope.
And the key point: the consequences land on the doctor's registration—their right to practise—not on a company's bank balance. That's a completely different kind of risk from a clinic fine, and it's why individual doctors are often more cautious than their clinics.