Tools & Wizards About Us
clinicalchoice.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 39

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    58% of other websites

  • 76

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 42% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 86

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    60% of websites

clinicalchoice.com

Clinical Choice

Page Load Speed

8.4 sec in total

First Response

44 ms

Resources Loaded

7.8 sec

Page Rendered

625 ms

clinicalchoice.com screenshot

About Website

Visit clinicalchoice.com now to see the best up-to-date Clinical Choice content for United States and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about clinicalchoice.com

Visit clinicalchoice.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Clinicalchoice.com page load time and found that the first response time was 44 ms and then it took 8.4 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 85% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

clinicalchoice.com performance score

39

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value1.8 s

88/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value8.6 s

1/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value8.4 s

18/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value750 ms

39/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.005

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value13.9 s

10/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

clinicalchoice.com

44 ms

clinicalchoice.com

34 ms

bootstrap.min.css

20 ms

main-default.css

30 ms

desktop-default.css

31 ms

Our browser made a total of 71 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 93% of them (66 requests) were addressed to the original Clinicalchoice.com, 3% (2 requests) were made to Code.jquery.com and 1% (1 request) were made to Googletagmanager.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (2.7 sec) belongs to the original domain Clinicalchoice.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 378.4 kB (14%)

Content Size

2.7 MB

After Optimization

2.4 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Clinicalchoice.com main page is 2.7 MB. This result falls beyond the top 1M of websites and identifies a large and not optimized web page that may take ages to load. 80% of websites need less resources to load and that’s why Accessify’s recommendations for optimization and resource minification can be helpful for this project. Images take 2.1 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-76%

Potential reduce by 37.1 kB

  • Original 48.7 kB
  • After minification 46.4 kB
  • After compression 11.6 kB

HTML content can be minified and compressed by a website’s server. The most efficient way is to compress content using GZIP which reduces data amount travelling through the network between server and browser. HTML code on this page is well minified. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 37.1 kB or 76% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-8%

Potential reduce by 166.5 kB

  • Original 2.1 MB
  • After minification 2.0 MB

Image size optimization can help to speed up a website loading time. The chart above shows the difference between the size before and after optimization. Clinical Choice images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-10%

Potential reduce by 37.2 kB

  • Original 372.1 kB
  • After minification 372.1 kB
  • After compression 334.9 kB

It’s better to minify JavaScript in order to improve website performance. The diagram shows the current total size of all JavaScript files against the prospective JavaScript size after its minification and compression. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.

CSS Optimization

-69%

Potential reduce by 137.5 kB

  • Original 199.9 kB
  • After minification 195.8 kB
  • After compression 62.3 kB

CSS files minification is very important to reduce a web page rendering time. The faster CSS files can load, the earlier a page can be rendered. Clinicalchoice.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 137.5 kB or 69% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 37 (74%)

Requests Now

50

After Optimization

13

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 50 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Clinical Choice. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 23 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 16 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

clinicalchoice.com

clinicalchoice.com

44 ms

clinicalchoice.com

clinicalchoice.com

34 ms

bootstrap.min.css

bootstrap.min.css

20 ms

main-default.css

main-default.css

30 ms

desktop-default.css

desktop-default.css

31 ms

tablet-default.css

tablet-default.css

30 ms

mobile-default.css

mobile-default.css

31 ms

main-home.css

main-home.css

30 ms

tablet-home.css

tablet-home.css

36 ms

mobile-home.css

mobile-home.css

35 ms

slick.css

slick.css

36 ms

all.min.css

all.min.css

37 ms

font-face.css

font-face.css

35 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

48 ms

styles.css

styles.css

51 ms

wpa.css

wpa.css

51 ms

swipebox.min.css

swipebox.min.css

50 ms

design.css

design.css

52 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

55 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

63 ms

jquery.swipebox.min.js

jquery.swipebox.min.js

53 ms

underscore.min.js

underscore.min.js

65 ms

infinite-scroll.pkgd.min.js

infinite-scroll.pkgd.min.js

68 ms

front.js

front.js

68 ms

js

js

120 ms

jquery-1.11.0.min.js

jquery-1.11.0.min.js

45 ms

jquery-migrate-1.2.1.min.js

jquery-migrate-1.2.1.min.js

48 ms

bootstrap.bundle.min.js

bootstrap.bundle.min.js

103 ms

main.js

main.js

101 ms

slick.min.js

slick.min.js

101 ms

index.js

index.js

102 ms

index.js

index.js

101 ms

wpa.js

wpa.js

101 ms

responsive-embeds.js

responsive-embeds.js

114 ms

api.js

api.js

99 ms

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

116 ms

regenerator-runtime.min.js

regenerator-runtime.min.js

115 ms

wp-polyfill.min.js

wp-polyfill.min.js

116 ms

index.js

index.js

114 ms

logo.webp

logo.webp

23 ms

Clinical-Choice_Home-Banner-2_75q.webp

Clinical-Choice_Home-Banner-2_75q.webp

23 ms

co1.png

co1.png

20 ms

co2.png

co2.png

22 ms

co3.png

co3.png

21 ms

Cart-copy@2x.png

Cart-copy@2x.png

25 ms

Scopevault-2-copy.png

Scopevault-2-copy.png

26 ms

aer-image.png

aer-image.png

45 ms

gi-accessories-image.png

gi-accessories-image.png

45 ms

home-bg1.png

home-bg1.png

45 ms

home-bg2.png

home-bg2.png

46 ms

home-bg3.png

home-bg3.png

46 ms

footer-bg.jpg

footer-bg.jpg

47 ms

polyfills.js

polyfills.js

36 ms

Raleway-Regular.woff

Raleway-Regular.woff

112 ms

recaptcha__en.js

recaptcha__en.js

105 ms

Raleway-Bold.woff

Raleway-Bold.woff

21 ms

Gotham-Medium.woff

Gotham-Medium.woff

76 ms

Raleway-Medium.woff

Raleway-Medium.woff

17 ms

fa-brands-400.woff

fa-brands-400.woff

21 ms

fa-brands-400.woff

fa-brands-400.woff

1840 ms

fa-solid-900.woff

fa-solid-900.woff

21 ms

fa-solid-900.woff

fa-solid-900.woff

1780 ms

fa-regular-400.woff

fa-regular-400.woff

76 ms

fa-regular-400.woff

fa-regular-400.woff

1869 ms

fa-solid-900.ttf

fa-solid-900.ttf

2348 ms

fa-brands-400.ttf

fa-brands-400.ttf

2377 ms

fa-regular-400.ttf

fa-regular-400.ttf

2673 ms

fa-solid-900.svg

fa-solid-900.svg

2206 ms

fa-brands-400.svg

fa-brands-400.svg

2239 ms

fa-regular-400.svg

fa-regular-400.svg

2068 ms

print.css

print.css

814 ms

Accessibility Review

clinicalchoice.com accessibility score

76

Accessibility Issues

ARIA

These are opportunities to improve the usage of ARIA in your application which may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

[aria-*] attributes do not match their roles

Names and labels

These are opportunities to improve the semantics of the controls in your application. This may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

Buttons do not have an accessible name

High

Image elements do not have [alt] attributes

High

Links do not have a discernible name

Contrast

These are opportunities to improve the legibility of your content.

Impact

Issue

High

Background and foreground colors do not have a sufficient contrast ratio.

Best Practices

clinicalchoice.com best practices score

75

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

High

Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

High

Browser errors were logged to the console

High

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

clinicalchoice.com SEO score

86

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Content Best Practices

Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.

Impact

Issue

High

Image elements do not have [alt] attributes

Mobile Friendly

Make sure your pages are mobile friendly so users don’t have to pinch or zoom in order to read the content pages. [Learn more](https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/).

Impact

Issue

High

Document uses legible font sizes

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Clinicalchoice.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and it matches the claimed language. Our system also found out that Clinicalchoice.com main page’s claimed encoding is utf-8. Use of this encoding format is the best practice as the main page visitors from all over the world won’t have any issues with symbol transcription.

Social Sharing Optimization

clinicalchoice.com

Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Clinical Choice. Lack of Open Graph description can be counter-productive for their social media presence, as such a description allows converting a website homepage (or other pages) into good-looking, rich and well-structured posts, when it is being shared on Facebook and other social media. For example, adding the following code snippet into HTML <head> tag will help to represent this web page correctly in social networks: