How to Interview a Client for a Case Study Without Ending Up With a Testimonial

28 August 2026·5 min read

Quick answer: A case study documents facts — the situation, the process, the outcome. A testimonial is an opinion or endorsement of you. For AHPRA-registered health professions, that distinction isn't a style preference — testimonials are prohibited outright under the National Law's advertising guidelines, and a badly run client interview will produce testimonial content by accident even when everyone's intention was to write a compliant case study. A structured interview script that stays aimed at facts, not feelings, is the fix. 🤍

It's an easy trap: you sit a genuinely happy client down, hit record, ask "so how did you find working with us," and twenty minutes later you have gold — except it's the exact kind of gold an AHPRA-registered practitioner can't publish, and the kind other regulated professions should think twice about too. 💖 Almost every "testimonial disguised as a case study" we've seen started from good intentions and one badly worded opening question.

What most practices get wrong when interviewing a client for a case study

The most common issue is the opening question itself. "How did you find working with us?" or "What would you say to someone considering us?" both invite an opinion about the provider — which is precisely what makes something a testimonial rather than a case study. The second issue is treating the label as the safeguard: calling it a "case study" on the page doesn't change the content underneath if it's still built from an endorsement-style quote. The third is skipping properly specific consent — agreeing in principle to "share your story" isn't the same as the client understanding exactly what will be published, where, and in what form.

The facts-not-feelings interview script

1. Situation (before):

"What was happening when you first came to see us?"
"What were you hoping to achieve?"
"What, if anything, had you already tried?"

2. Process (what actually happened — facts only):

"What did the process actually involve, from your side?"
"Roughly how long did it take, or how many sessions/meetings?"
"What changed at each stage?"

3. Outcome (result, described factually):

"Where are things now compared to when we started?"
"What can you do now that you couldn't before?"
"What does day-to-day look like for you now?"

4. Consent and scope (always last, always specific):

"Are you comfortable with these details being published?"
"Is there anything here you'd want kept general rather than specific?"
"Are you happy for this to be used on [name the exact channels]?"

Red flag phrase list — if these words come up in the interview, don't quote them directly; rewrite the point as a factual, third-person statement instead: "amazing," "the best," "I'd recommend," "changed my life," "highly recommend."

Psychology practice interviewing a client after a course of treatment: Questions stay on presenting concern in general, non-diagnostic terms, the number of sessions and strategies used in broad terms, and functional outcomes like "returned to work" or "sleeping through the night" — never a quoted opinion of the practitioner, and never anything published under the client's identifiable name without separate, specific written consent.

Financial planning practice documenting a client's journey to retirement readiness: Interview covers the starting position in general terms (e.g. "hadn't consolidated their super"), the planning process undertaken, and a factual outcome such as "now has a documented retirement income strategy" — no specific return figures, and no language implying a guaranteed result, which financial services advertising rules take seriously.

Law firm documenting a resolved commercial dispute: Before any interview questions, the firm confirms exactly what can be disclosed under privilege and any settlement confidentiality terms. The published version describes the dispute type in general terms, the process (e.g. mediation reached before trial), and a result framed as "a resolution that met the client's commercial objectives" — no dollar figures or details that could identify the other party unless the client explicitly clears it.

Turning the interview into a compliant case study

Structure the finished piece as Situation / Process / Outcome, in third person, without needing a single direct quote to carry it. For AHPRA-registered professions specifically, the safest approach is to avoid attributed client quotes in published case studies altogether — even a quote that feels purely factual can read as an endorsement once it's sitting under a practitioner's name on a marketing page. For professions like law and financial planning, direct quotes may be more workable, but they still need to avoid outcome guarantees and, in legal matters, anything that breaches privilege or settlement confidentiality. Whatever the profession, get written consent that specifies exactly what's being published and where — not a general "yes, share my story."

Please note: general information, not legal/financial/medical advice — check current official guidance before relying on it.

💡 If it would work as a five-star Google review, don't publish it as a case study. That's the fastest gut check before anything goes live — if a sentence would sit comfortably as a review, rewrite it as a fact instead.

Mistakes to avoid

Publishing any direct client quote that reads as an endorsement for an AHPRA-registered profession — this is a compliance issue, not a style choice
Assuming the words "case study" in a title make endorsement-style content compliant
Skipping specific, written consent about exactly what will be published and where
Including identifying legal details without checking privilege and confidentiality first
Using outcome language that could be read as a guaranteed result, especially in financial services

Frequently asked questions

Can AHPRA-registered practitioners use case studies at all?

Yes — factual, non-identifying, non-endorsing case studies are generally fine. It's testimonials and endorsement-style quotes specifically that are prohibited, not outcome-based content itself.

Is a client quote ever okay for a psychology or allied health practice?

Generally, no — even a client's own words about their outcome are safer presented as a factual statement ("the client reported improved sleep") than as an attributed, published quote. The honest limit here is that this is genuinely one of the stricter areas of AHPRA advertising guidance, so when in doubt, leave the quote out.

What if the client offers a glowing quote unprompted?

Thank them, and for AHPRA-registered professions, don't publish it as given — redirect it into a factual description of the outcome instead.

Does this rule extend to Google reviews too?

That's a genuinely separate and more contested area — AHPRA guidance is aimed at content practitioners actively publish and control, not third-party reviews on platforms like Google. Keep case study content on your own channels strictly factual, and get specific advice on review moderation rather than assuming the same rule applies identically.

Keep reading 🤍

Written by

Kate, founder of Chronically Online

I help Gold Coast and Brisbane businesses grow with branding, websites and marketing that actually works.

Work with me ✦