J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31(09): 636-645
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1717123
Research Article

A Content Analysis of YouTube Videos Related to Hearing Aids

Vinaya Manchaiah
1   Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas
2   Department of Speech and Hearing, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Monica L. Bellon-Harn
1   Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas
Marcella Michaels
1   Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas
Vinay Swarnalatha Nagaraj
3   Audiology Program, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Eldré W. Beukes
1   Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas
4   Department of Vision and Hearing Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations


Background Increasingly, people access Internet-based health information about various chronic conditions including hearing loss and hearing aids. YouTube is one media source that has gained much popularity in recent years.

Purpose The current study examines the source, content, understandability, and actionability of YouTube videos related to hearing aids.

Research Design Cross-sectional design by analyzing the videos at single point in time.

Study Sample One hundred most frequently viewed videos in YouTube.

Intervention Not applicable.

Data Collection and Analysis The 100 most-viewed English language videos targeting individuals seeking information regarding hearing aids were identified and manually coded. Data collection included general information about the video (e.g., source, title, authorship, date of upload, duration of video), popularity-driven measures (e.g., number of views, likes, dislikes), and the video source (consumer, professional, or media). The video content was analyzed to examine what pertinent information they contained in relation to a predetermined fact sheet. Understandability and actionability of the videos were examined using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials.

Results Of the 100 most-viewed videos, 11 were consumer-based, 80 were created by professionals, and the remaining 9 were media-based. General information about hearing aids, hearing aid types, and handling and maintenance of hearing aids were the most frequently discussed content categories with over 50% of all videos commenting on these areas. Differences were noted between source types in several content categories. The overall understandability scores for videos from all sources were 74%, which was considered adequate; however, the actionability scores for all the videos were 68%, which is considered inadequate.

Conclusion YouTube videos about hearing aids focused on a range of issues and some differences were found between source types. The poor actionability of these videos may result in incongruous consumer actions. Content and quality of the information in hearing aid YouTube videos needs to be improved with input from professionals.

Publication History

Article published online:
20 November 2020

© 2020. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

  • References

  • 1 Fox S. The social life of health information, 2011. 2015 Accessed August 11, 2019 at: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2011/PIP_Health_Topics.pdf
  • 2 Van de Belt TH, Engelen LJ, Berben SA, Teerenstra S, Samsom M, Schoonhoven L. Internet and social media for health-related information and communication in health care: preferences of the Dutch general population. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (10) e220
  • 3 Flanagin AJ, Metzger MJ. Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journal Mass Commun Q 2000; 77 (03) 515-540
  • 4 Cline RJW, Haynes KM. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res 2001; 16 (06) 671-692
  • 5 Pew Research Center. Technology use among seniors. 2017 Accessed December 03, 2019 at: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/
  • 6 Akkermans M. Ouderen maken inhaalslag op het internet [Elderly making inroads on the internet]. 2014 Accessed August 11, 2019 at: http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/vrije-tijd-cultuur/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2011/2011-3537-wm.htm
  • 7 Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division. World Population Ageing 2015. 2015 Accessed August 11, 2019 at: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WPA2015_Report.pdf
  • 8 Medlock S, Eslami S, Askari M. et al. Health information-seeking behavior of seniors who use the Internet: a survey. J Med Internet Res 2015; 17 (01) e10
  • 9 Henshaw H, Clark DP, Kang S, Ferguson MA. Computer skills and internet use in adults aged 50-74 years: influence of hearing difficulties. J Med Internet Res 2012; 14 (04) e113
  • 10 Thorén ES, Oberg M, Wänström G, Andersson G, Lunner T. Internet access and use in adults with hearing loss. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (05) e91
  • 11 Choudhury M, Dinger Z, Fichera E. The utilization of social media in the hearing aid community. Am J Audiol 2017; 26 (01) 1-9
  • 12 Go E, You KH, Jung E, Shim H. Why do we use different types of websites and assign them different levels of credibility? Structural relations among users' motives, types of websites, information credibility, and trust in the press. Comput Human Behav 2016; 54: 231-239
  • 13 Salmerón L, Fajardo I, Gómez-Puerta M. Selection and evaluation of Internet information by adults with intellectual disabilities. Eur J Spec Needs Educ 2019; 34 (04) 272-284
  • 14 Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 2002; 17 (03) 180-185
  • 15 Clement J. Most popular social networks worldwide as of July 2019. 2019 . Accessed August 8, 2019 at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
  • 16 Wong CA, Ostapovich G, Kramer-Golinkoff E, Griffis H, Asch DA, Merchant RM. How U.S. children's hospitals use social media: a mixed methods study. Healthc (Amst) 2016; 4 (01) 15-21
  • 17 Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J 2015; 21 (03) 173-194
  • 18 Zuzelo PR. Understandability and actionability: using the PEMAT to benefit health literacy. Holist Nurs Pract 2019; 33 (03) 191-193
  • 19 Basch CH, Yin J, Kollia B. et al. Public online information about tinnitus: a cross-sectional study of YouTube videos. Noise Health 2018; 20 (92) 1-8
  • 20 Beaunoyer E, Arsenault M, Lomanowska AM, Guitton MJ. Understanding online health information: evaluation, tools, and strategies. Patient Educ Couns 2017; 100 (02) 183-189
  • 21 Laplante-Lévesque A, Brännström KJ, Andersson G, Lunner T. Quality and readability of English-language internet information for adults with hearing impairment and their significant others. Int J Audiol 2012; 51 (08) 618-626
  • 22 Manchaiah V, Dockens AL, Flagge A. et al. Quality and readability of English-language Internet information for tinnitus. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30 (01) 31-40
  • 23 Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and User's Guide: an instrument to assess the understandability and actionability of print and audiovisual patient education materials. 2013 Accessed January 18, 2020 at: https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/prevention-chronic-care/improve/self-mgmt/pemat/index.html
  • 24 Shoemaker SJ, Wolf MS, Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Couns 2014; 96 (03) 395-403
  • 25 Bellon-Harn ML, Manchaiah V, Morris L. A cross-sectional descriptive analysis of portrayal of Autism Spectrum Disorders in YouTube videos: a short report. Autism 2020; 24 (01) 263-268
  • 26 Gabarron E, Fernandez-Luque L, Armayones M, Lau AY. Identifying measures used for assessing quality of YouTube videos with patient health information: a review of current literature. Interact J Med Res 2013; 2 (01) e6
  • 27 Van den Eynde J, Crauwels A, Demaerel PG. et al. YouTube videos as a source of information about immunology for medical students: cross-sectional study. JMIR Med Educ 2019; 5 (01) e12605
  • 28 Basch CH, Menafro A, Mongiovi J, Hillyer GC, Basch CE. A content analysis of YouTube™ videos related to prostate cancer. Am J Men Health 2017; 11 (01) 154-157
  • 29 Ruppert L, Køster B, Siegert AM. et al. YouTube as a source of health information: analysis of sun protection and skin cancer prevention related issues. Dermatol Online J 2017; 23 (01) pii : 13030/qt91401264
  • 30 Chan K, Zhang T. An exploratory study on perception of celebrity endorsement in public services advertising. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 2019; 16 (2–4): 195-209
  • 31 Jin SV. “Celebrity 2.0 and beyond!” Effects of Facebook profile sources on social networking advertising. Comput Human Behav 2018; 79: 154-168
  • 32 Spry A, Pappu R, Cornwell TB. Celebrity endorsement, brand credibility and brand equity. Eur J Mark 2011; 45 (06) 882-909
  • 33 Park M, Naaman M, Berger J. 2016 A data-driven study of view duration on YouTube. Proceedings of the Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2016). Accessed December 4, 2019 at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.08308
  • 34 Eysenbach G, Sa ER, Diepgen TL. Shopping around the Internet today and tomorrow: towards the millennium of cybermedicine. BMJ 1999; 319: 1294