How no-show-proof is your salon?

How the score works: 8 rules, their evidence and its strength

Reminders carry the most points (52 of 100) because they have the strongest evidence. That evidence comes from healthcare trials and is transferable, not salon-specific. No peer-reviewed salon no-show study exists. Vendor figures come from booking-software companies, without a published method.

1. R1 · Automated reminders for every appointment up to 30 pts Strength: Strong (transferable from healthcare)
   In a Cochrane review, text reminders raised attendance from 67.8% to 78.6% versus no reminder (RR 1.14). Phone and text worked about the same. A BMJ Open review found no-shows fell from 21% to 15% with text notifications. Both cover healthcare appointments, not salons. Evidence: E1: Cochrane review CD007458, 2013 peer-reviewed · healthcare (transferable); E2: Robotham et al., BMJ Open, 2016 peer-reviewed · healthcare (transferable)
2. R2 · Two reminders beat one up to 12 pts Strength: Moderate (transferable from healthcare)
   In a randomised trial of 54,066 appointments, reminders 3 days and 1 day before had 4.4% missed visits, versus 5.3% for one reminder at 1 day and 5.8% for one at 3 days. Another review found multiple notifications beat single ones. Healthcare, not salons. Evidence: E3: Steiner et al., AJMC, 2018 (RCT, n=54,066) peer-reviewed RCT · healthcare (transferable); E2: Robotham et al., BMJ Open, 2016 peer-reviewed · healthcare (transferable)
3. R7 · Reminders state the specific value of the slot up to 10 pts Strength: Moderate (transferable, 2 RCTs)
   Two NHS trials found that reminders stating the specific cost of a missed appointment cut no-shows from 11.1% to 8.4%, and the result replicated. Vague “general cost” wording did less (9.9%). A social-norm message raised cancellations. Healthcare, not salons. Evidence: E6: Hallsworth et al., PLoS ONE, 2015 (2 RCTs) peer-reviewed RCTs · healthcare (transferable)
4. R3 · A payment commitment at booking (size not scored) up to 15 pts Strength: Weak–moderate (uncontrolled vendor data; the only RCT found no effect)
   Every salon-software vendor that reports on deposits or fees shows a drop: for example, Phorest reports 5.4% → 1.9% (it reported −47% for the same feature elsewhere that year), Kitomba −29% and Square −21%. But these are uncontrolled before/after numbers from opt-in users. The only randomised trial we found, of a €34 fine in Danish healthcare, found no effect (5% vs 5%). Treat payment commitments as reasonable but unproven. Evidence: E10: Phorest, 2021 vendor data, no published method; E11: Kitomba, 2024 vendor data, no published method; E13: Square, 2024 vendor data, no published method; E7: Blæhr et al., BMJ Open, 2018 (RCT) peer-reviewed RCT · healthcare (transferable)
5. R6 · Target friction at new clients, past no-shows and far-ahead bookings up to 12 pts Strength: Moderate (transferable from healthcare)
   A review of 105 studies found past no-shows and long lead times were the most common predictors of a no-show. One practice that cut its booking horizon from 28 days to 1 saw no-shows fall from 7.8% to 3.9%. In the reminder trial, high-risk patients missed far more (20.5–25%). Healthcare, not salons. Evidence: E4: Dantas et al., Health Policy, 2018 (105 studies) peer-reviewed review · healthcare (transferable); E5: Margham et al., BJGP, 2021 peer-reviewed · healthcare (transferable); E3: Steiner et al., AJMC, 2018 (RCT, n=54,066) peer-reviewed RCT · healthcare (transferable)
6. R5 · Waitlist / backfill for cancellations up to 11 pts Strength: Weak–moderate (vendor data)
   Zenoti’s 2024 US/Canada data shows cancellations above no-shows in most segments (salons 8% vs 3%, nails 16% vs 1%). GlossGenius says its waitlist fills “12% more cancellations”. Both are vendor data. Evidence: E16: Zenoti, 2024 data (US/Canada) vendor data; E17: GlossGenius (undated); Zenoti, 2025 data vendor data, no published method
7. R4 · Written policy shown at booking, notice window ≥24h up to 10 pts Strength: Weak (no comparative evidence)
   No study compares notice windows, so 24h and 48h score the same. Booking apps let you show the policy and require clients to accept it (GlossGenius help, Vagaro help). Evidence: none comparative (see research/references/01-no-show.md)
8. R8 · Confirmation requests: not scored not scored Strength: Weak
   A review of two-way text trials found no clear attendance effect versus standard care (RR 1.03, 0.95–1.12). It wasn’t compared with one-way reminders, so we neither reward nor penalise it. Healthcare, not salons. Evidence: E18: Ødegård et al., PLoS ONE, 2022 peer-reviewed · healthcare (transferable)

Weights are our editorial reading of research/references/01-no-show.md (checked 2026-10-17), not a statistical model. A bigger deposit earns no extra points, and 24h and 48h windows score the same, because no study compares them. Not legal advice.

Questions owners ask