Creative Scoring Dashboard

Cardiac Wire

All-Time Scoreboard — Cardiac Wire (sorted by CPQL) · Updated Apr 2, 2026

Creative	Spend	Subs	CPL	GOOD	Rate	CPQL	Signal
DCT_114 ReplaceJournals	$5	2	$2.48	2	100.0%	$4.97	TEST
DCT_117 Old vs. New	$114	46	$2.48	20	43.5%	$5.71	SCALE
DCT_119 Stay Current	$12	5	$2.48	2	40.0%	$6.21	TEST
DCT_112 EndangerPatient	$92	37	$2.48	13	35.1%	$7.07	SCALE
DCT_123 If you, BUT	$92	37	$2.48	12	32.4%	$7.66	SCALE
DCT_118 Text Call out	$1,071	431	$2.48	88	20.4%	$12.17	HOLD
DCT_103 Confession	$1,061	427	$2.48	64	15.0%	$16.58	HOLD
DCT_101 Reasons Why	$139	56	$2.48	7	12.5%	$19.88	REDUCE
DCT_104 Life hack	$139	56	$2.48	6	10.7%	$23.19	REDUCE
DCT_105 UGC doctor	$30	12	$2.48	0	0.0%	—	KILL
DCT_115 AppleNotes	$7	3	$2.48	0	0.0%	—	KILL
DCT_121 Newspaper	$5	2	$2.48	0	0.0%	—	KILL

W05 — Jan 26

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	80	2	2.5%	$367	$183.32
DCT_104	14	2	14.3%	$249	$124.44
DCT_101	5	0	0.0%	$39	—

W06 — Feb 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	237	22	9.3%	$242	$11.53
DCT_104	195	30	15.4%	$367	$13.11
DCT_101	28	4	14.3%	$47	$11.74
DCT_105	25	1	4.0%	$41	$41.19

W07 — Feb 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	93	15	16.1%	$223	$14.85
DCT_104	141	22	15.6%	$318	$15.14
DCT_101	13	2	15.4%	$87	$43.31
DCT_105	10	1	10.0%	$61	$60.62

W08 — Feb 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	83	20	24.1%	$302	$15.09
DCT_104	68	15	22.1%	$154	$10.30
DCT_101	24	5	20.8%	$114	$22.84
DCT_105	15	1	6.7%	$39	$39.24
DCT_112	1	0	0.0%	$55	—

W09 — Feb 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	88	23	26.1%	$422	$18.34
DCT_104	35	4	11.4%	$133	$33.36
DCT_101	24	7	29.2%	$61	$8.68
DCT_112	16	7	43.8%	$42	$6.07
DCT_105	7	0	0.0%	$38	—

W10 — Mar 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	117	25	21.4%	$304	$13.21
DCT_104	35	0	0.0%	$71	—
DCT_101	15	1	6.7%	$45	$45.05
DCT_112	6	2	33.3%	$53	$26.66
DCT_105	6	0	0.0%	$15	—

W11 — Mar 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_118	75	37	49.3%	$416	$11.23
DCT_103	55	16	29.1%	$184	$11.50
DCT_101	9	3	33.3%	$38	$12.59
DCT_112	6	2	33.3%	$36	$18.05

W12 — Mar 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_118	195	33	16.9%	$256	$7.75
DCT_103	102	12	11.8%	$87	$7.27
DCT_112	12	3	25.0%	$31	$15.56
DCT_117	9	2	22.2%	$23	$11.63
DCT_101	12	0	0.0%	$31	—

W13 — Mar 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_118	86	11	12.8%	—	—
DCT_103	40	3	7.5%	—	—
DCT_101	9	1	11.1%	—	—
DCT_117	6	1	16.7%	—	—

W13 spend data not available in Pipeboard weekly breakdown.

W14 — Mar 30

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_112	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_117	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_123	—	—	—	—	—

W14 (Mar 30 – Apr 2) subscriber data included in all-time totals. Weekly breakdown not yet available.

Imaging Wire

All-Time Scoreboard — Imaging Wire (sorted by CPQL) · Updated Apr 2, 2026

Creative	Spend	Subs	CPL	GOOD	Rate	CPQL	Signal
DCT_112 EndangerPatient	$6	1	$6.05	1	100.0%	$6.05	TEST
DCT_117 Old vs. New	$30	5	$6.05	4	80.0%	$7.56	TEST
DCT_110 Radiologist Confession	$30	5	$6.05	3	60.0%	$10.08	TEST
DCT_114 ReplaceJournals	$611	101	$6.05	40	39.6%	$15.28	SCALE
DCT_123 If you, BUT	$212	35	$6.05	12	34.3%	$17.65	SCALE
DCT_119 Stay Current	$260	43	$6.05	13	30.2%	$20.01	HOLD
DCT_104 Life hack	$24	4	$6.05	1	25.0%	$24.20	TEST
DCT_103 Confession	$1,192	197	$6.05	45	22.8%	$26.49	HOLD
DCT_118 Text Call out	$85	14	$6.05	2	14.3%	$42.35	REDUCE
DCT_120 Information Overload	$42	7	$6.05	1	14.3%	$42.36	KILL
DCT_101 Reasons Why	$24	4	$6.05	0	0.0%	—	KILL
DCT_113 GPTResponse	$12	2	$6.05	0	0.0%	—	KILL
DCT_115 AppleNotes	$12	2	$6.05	0	0.0%	—	KILL
DCT_122 Make Better Decisions	$6	1	$6.05	0	0.0%	—	KILL

W05 — Jan 26

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	15	7	46.7%	$472	$67.38

W06 — Feb 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	108	48	44.4%	$480	$10.66
DCT_104	11	3	27.3%	$39	$19.56

W07 — Feb 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	76	32	42.1%	$398	$14.75
DCT_114	6	3	50.0%	$25	$12.26

W08 — Feb 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	55	18	32.7%	$349	$20.54
DCT_114	6	2	33.3%	$107	$53.64
DCT_104	9	5	55.6%	$0	—

W09 — Feb 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	59	20	33.9%	$291	$14.54
DCT_114	21	11	52.4%	$191	$17.34
DCT_110	6	3	50.0%	$39	$12.90

W10 — Mar 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	38	13	34.2%	$308	$23.70
DCT_114	31	9	29.0%	$194	$21.60
DCT_110	5	3	60.0%	$15	$7.40

W11 — Mar 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	52	14	26.9%	$478	$34.12
DCT_114	22	13	59.1%	$40	$3.06

W12 — Mar 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	53	7	13.2%	$220	$31.43
DCT_114	12	4	33.3%	$109	$36.43
DCT_119	8	2	25.0%	$133	$66.27

W13 — Mar 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_103	24	4	16.7%	—	—
DCT_119	16	6	37.5%	—	—

W13 spend data not available in Pipeboard weekly breakdown.

W14 — Mar 30

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_114	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_123	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_119	—	—	—	—	—

W14 (Mar 30 – Apr 2) subscriber data included in all-time totals. Weekly breakdown not yet available.

Digital Health Wire

All-Time Scoreboard — Digital Health Wire (sorted by CPQL) · Updated Apr 2, 2026

Creative	Spend	Subs	CPL	GOOD	Rate	CPQL	Signal
DCT_117 Old vs. New	$23	6	$3.85	5	83.3%	$4.62	TEST
DCT_114 ReplaceJournals	$27	7	$3.85	4	57.1%	$6.73	TEST
DCT_119 Stay Current	$27	7	$3.85	3	42.9%	$8.98	TEST
DCT_121 Newspaper	$27	7	$3.85	3	42.9%	$8.98	TEST
DCT_115 AppleNotes	$381	99	$3.85	42	42.4%	$9.07	SCALE
DCT_122 Make Better Decisions	$131	34	$3.85	12	35.3%	$10.90	SCALE
DCT_104 Life hack	$562	146	$3.85	41	28.1%	$13.70	HOLD
DCT_103 Confession	$58	15	$3.85	4	26.7%	$14.43	HOLD
DCT_102 Why read X	$50	13	$3.85	3	23.1%	$16.67	HOLD
DCT_123 If you, BUT	$1,920	499	$3.85	110	22.0%	$17.45	SCALE
DCT_101 Reasons Why	$8	2	$3.85	0	0.0%	—	KILL

W05 — Jan 26

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_104	13	8	61.5%	$425	$53.15

W06 — Feb 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_104	95	37	38.9%	$372	$10.05
DCT_102	8	3	37.5%	$106	$35.40
DCT_115	5	3	60.0%	$0	— *

W07 — Feb 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_104	86	32	37.2%	$424	$13.67
DCT_102	13	5	38.5%	$47	$9.37

W08 — Feb 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_104	82	33	40.2%	$206	$6.24
DCT_115	12	8	66.7%	$0	— *
DCT_102	10	5	50.0%	$52	$10.37

W09 — Feb 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_115	66	34	51.5%	$0	— *
DCT_104	42	12	28.6%	$192	$15.99
DCT_102	7	2	28.6%	$49	$24.57

W10 — Mar 2

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_115	54	23	42.6%	$0	— *
DCT_104	54	17	31.5%	$274	$16.11
DCT_102	6	2	33.3%	$65	$32.52

W11 — Mar 9

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_104	60	17	28.3%	$106	$6.24
DCT_122	21	8	38.1%	$49	$6.12
DCT_115	22	7	31.8%	$0	— *

W12 — Mar 16

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_123	183	55	30.1%	$381	$6.93
DCT_104	17	1	5.9%	$32	$31.98
DCT_122	4	1	25.0%	$30	$30.17
DCT_115	3	1	33.3%	$0	— *

W13 — Mar 23

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_123	109	24	22.0%	—	—
DCT_122	4	1	25.0%	—	—

W13 spend data not available in Pipeboard weekly breakdown.

* DCT_115 weekly spend unavailable from Pipeboard weekly breakdown. All-time: $381 spend, $9.07 CPQL.

W14 — Mar 30

Creative	Subs	GOOD	Rate	Spend	CPQL
DCT_123	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_115	—	—	—	—	—
DCT_122	—	—	—	—	—

W14 (Mar 30 – Apr 2) subscriber data included in all-time totals. Weekly breakdown not yet available.

Key trends (through Apr 2, 2026): CW: New creatives DCT_117, DCT_112, DCT_123 all outperforming legacy DCT_118 on quality rate — rotate budget. IW: DCT_114 remains strongest at $15.28 CPQL across 101 subs; DCT_123 now confirmed at 34.3% rate. DHW: DCT_115 and DCT_122 are proven scalers ($9.07 and $10.90 CPQL). DCT_123 DHW is the volume leader (499 subs, 22% rate, $17.45 CPQL) — still viable at scale. DCT_117 and DCT_114 DHW show exceptional quality rates (83%/57%) but minimal spend — test further.

Cardiac Wire

	TFM	GL
Subscribers	2,304	2,469
GOOD	383 (16.6%)	570 (23.1%)
Retirees Excluded	46	16
— HC Org + Title	66	83
— HC Org Email	109	230
— Personal + HC Title	172	217
Physicians	113 (33.5%)	42 (8.0%)
Executives	52 (15.4%)	31 (5.9%)
Nurses	35 (10.4%)	160 (30.4%)
Allied Health	15 (4.5%)	38 (7.2%)
Unknown Role	109 (32.3%)	230 (43.6%)
Total Spend	$5,724	$5,535
CPL (per sub)	$2.48	$2.24
Cost Per Qualified (CPQL)	$14.95	$9.71

GL leads CPQL ($9.71 vs $14.95) and CPL ($2.24 vs $2.48). But GL's GOOD is 30% nurses. TFM delivers 3.2 physicians per nurse.

Imaging Wire

	TFM	GL
Subscribers	821	670
GOOD	268 (32.6%)	241 (36.0%)
Retirees Excluded	17	0
— HC Org + Title	53	47
— HC Org Email	71	79
— Personal + HC Title	122	96
Physicians	51 (22.1%)	32 (14.4%)
Executives	26 (11.3%)	14 (6.3%)
Nurses	1 (0.4%)	0 (0.0%)
Allied Health	63 (27.3%)	66 (29.7%)
Unknown Role	71 (30.7%)	79 (35.6%)
Total Spend	$4,968	$5,384
CPL (per sub)	$6.05	$8.04
Cost Per Qualified (CPQL)	$18.54	$22.34

TFM wins IW on both CPL ($6.05 vs $8.04) and CPQL ($18.54 vs $22.34). TFM has more physicians (51 vs 32).

Digital Health Wire

	TFM	GL
Subscribers	1,292	1,319
GOOD	405 (31.3%)	603 (45.7%)
Retirees Excluded	11	0
— HC Org + Title	81	118
— HC Org Email	117	358
— Personal + HC Title	158	99
Physicians	10 (2.8%)	14 (2.4%)
Executives	138 (39.2%)	115 (20.0%)
Nurses	11 (3.1%)	4 (0.7%)
Allied Health	12 (3.4%)	10 (1.7%)
Unknown Role	117 (33.2%)	358 (62.3%)
Total Spend	$4,971	$5,274
CPL (per sub)	$3.85	$4.00
Cost Per Qualified (CPQL)	$12.27	$8.75

GL leads DHW CPQL ($8.75 vs $12.27). But 62% of GL GOOD are unconfirmed role.

Data Notes

Archived & cleaned subscribers are excluded from these counts. Mailchimp shows 5–7% of ad-sourced subscribers have been archived or cleaned since Feb 1 (CW: 367, IW: 168, DHW: 184). These were likely removed by the client for quality reasons. They are not in our subscriber data and are not scored — they would almost certainly score EXCLUDE, which means GOOD counts and CPQL are unaffected, but total subscriber counts and CPL are slightly understated.
CPL here ≠ Meta Ads Manager CPL. Our CPL = Spend ÷ confirmed Mailchimp subscribers. Meta reports a lower CPL because it counts all "lead" events (pixel fires, form submits) — many of which never become confirmed subscribers. The gap is typically 2–3x.
Cross-signups excluded. Subscribers are counted only on the newsletter their ad targeted. A Cardiac Wire ad that drives a cross-signup to Imaging Wire via the widget is counted in CW only.
Retirees excluded. Subscribers with "retired", "emeritus", or "former" in their title or company are scored EXCLUDE regardless of email domain or other signals.

Newsletter

Agency

Score

Reason

0 of 0 rows

Date	Email	Title	Company	Creative	Score	Reason	Tier	Newsletter	Agency

How Scoring Works

Each subscriber is scored using a replication of the client's methodology — a combination of email domain signals and job title keywords. Subscribers pass if they show at least one strong healthcare professional signal.

The result is one of three outcomes: GOOD (likely ICP), EXCLUDE (not ICP), or Retired (excluded from quality calculations).

Scoring Tiers

HC Org + Title — Healthcare organization email AND a matching job title. Highest confidence. Scores GOOD.
HC Org Email — Healthcare organization email domain (hospital, health system, medical school) with no clear title match. Scores GOOD.
Personal Email + HC Title — Personal email (Gmail, etc.) but job title clearly matches ICP (e.g., "Cardiologist", "CMO"). Scores GOOD.
No HC Signal — Neither email nor title matches healthcare ICP. Scores EXCLUDE.
Retired — Title explicitly indicates retirement. Excluded from quality rate calculations entirely.

Quality Rate Definition

Quality Rate = GOOD ÷ (Total subscribers − Retired). Retirees are removed from the denominator because they represent a data quality artifact, not a media buying signal.

Scoring Examples

Email	Title	Score	Reason
j.smith@clevelandclinic.org	Interventional Cardiologist	GOOD	HC Org + Title
m.jones@massgeneral.org	Administrator	GOOD	HC Org Email
dr.lee@gmail.com	Chief Medical Officer	GOOD	Personal + HC Title
john.doe@gmail.com	Marketing Manager	EXCLUDE	No HC Signal
r.williams@mayo.edu	Retired Physician	EXCLUDE	Retired

What This Dashboard Doesn't Cover

Subscribers acquired before Feb 1, 2026
Cross-signups (subscribers acquired from another newsletter on the same list)
Organic (non-paid) subscriber sources
Engagement or open rate data — scoring is identity-only
Archived/cleaned Mailchimp subscribers (5–7% of ad-sourced subs, removed by client)
Meta lead events that never became confirmed Mailchimp subscribers

How This Was Built

This scoring system was independently built by replicating the client's GOOD/EXCLUDE methodology from their shared analysis spreadsheet.

Step	Source	What We Did
1. Domain dictionary	Client xlsx (6,107 scored subscribers)	Extracted 1,008 healthcare org email domains from leads the client scored as GOOD. Added pattern rules for .edu, .gov, .mil, and domains containing "health", "hospital", "medical", etc.
2. Title keywords	Client xlsx + standard HC taxonomy	Built keyword list from titles the client scored as GOOD (physician, MD, cardiologist, nurse, director, etc.). Added retiree exclusion rules based on client feedback in Slack about non-target retirees.
3. Cross-signup logic	Client call (Mar 26) + UTM analysis	Per client team: only count subscribers on the newsletter their ad targeted. We match each subscriber's UTM to the campaign's target newsletter and exclude cross-signup spillover.
4. Subscriber data	Mailchimp API (live pull Mar 27)	Pulled all ad-sourced members (status: subscribed) from all 3 newsletter lists. Updated Apr 2, 2026.
5. Spend data	Meta Ads API via Pipeboard	Pulled ad-level and adset-level spend for Feb 1 – Apr 2. Weekly breakdown available through W12 (Mar 16–22). W13–W14 spend not broken out by week.
6. Scoring	Automated replication	Applied domain + title + retiree rules to every subscriber. Scored as GOOD, EXCLUDE, or Retired. Assigned role tiers (Physician, Executive, Nurse, Allied Health) where 1P title data exists.

Validation Against Client Scoring

We compared our automated scores against the client's manual xlsx for the overlapping window (Feb 1 – Mar 15). Our replication matches within 5% on all four tested segments.

Newsletter	Agency	Our Count	Client Count	Delta
Cardiac Wire	TFM	1,549	1,511	+2.5%
Cardiac Wire	GL	1,790	1,783	+0.4%
Digital Health Wire	TFM	688	690	−0.3%
Digital Health Wire	GL	1,013	1,031	−1.7%

Imaging Wire was not included in the client's original analysis. Our IW scoring is net-new and pending client validation.

Known Limitations & Accuracy Notes

Factor	Impact	Direction
Archived/cleaned subs missing	5–7% of ad-sourced subscribers were archived or cleaned in Mailchimp (CW: 367, IW: 168, DHW: 184). These are not scored. Most were likely removed for being non-target — they would score EXCLUDE.	Understates total subs, overstates quality rate by ~1–2 points. CPQL unaffected.
Executive title false positives	~5.7% of GOOD leads were scored via "Personal Email + HC Title" with generic executive titles (CEO, Owner, President) at non-healthcare companies.	Slightly overstates GOOD count for both agencies equally. Does not skew the comparison.
HC domain dictionary completeness	Built from 1,008 domains in client's xlsx + pattern matching. May miss some smaller hospitals or international health systems not in the training set.	Slightly understates GOOD for "HC Org Email" bucket. Validated to within 2.5% of client scoring.
Meta CPL vs Mailchimp CPL	Meta reports 2–3x more "leads" than confirmed Mailchimp subscribers. Our CPL uses Mailchimp (more conservative). Meta CPL would be ~40–60% lower.	Our CPL is higher than what you see in Ads Manager. CPQL is the same either way (uses GOOD count, not total leads).
W13–W14 spend gap	Pipeboard weekly breakdown ends at W12 (Mar 16–22). W13 (Mar 23–29) and W14 (Mar 30 – Apr 2) have subscriber data but no weekly spend breakdown. All-time totals include W13–W14 spend.	Weekly CPQL shows "—" for W13–W14. All-time scoreboard and Tab 2 totals are complete.
AppleNotes weekly spend	DCT_115 has a naming mismatch between Pipeboard ("Transformation") and Mailchimp ("Tramsfromation"). All-time spend is correct ($381 DHW), but weekly breakdown could not be mapped.	DCT_115 weekly CPQL shows "—". All-time CPQL ($9.07 DHW) is accurate.
1 borderline scoring case	Canadian .ca university domains are treated as HC org emails (same as .edu). One student at a non-medical university was scored GOOD.	Negligible — 1 subscriber across 5,625.

QA Verification (3 independent audits, Mar 27)

Dashboard numbers vs source data: 27 checks passed, 0 failed. All spend, subs, GOOD, CPL, and CPQL values independently recomputed and confirmed.
Scoring methodology: Cross-signup exclusion verified (0 violations). Retiree exclusion verified (0 GOOD retirees). 20-lead sampling: 19–20/20 legitimate GOOD scores.
Spend data: All 6 agency totals independently verified. All high-CPQL outliers explained by small sample sizes. No $0-spend anomalies on creatives with 50+ subs.