Lab Report 4 Social Media of Cochlear Implants How has the cochlear implant social media audience evolved, and to what extent has it shaped the communities of deaf culture? Cochlear implants have been received by over 200,000 people in need worldwide, and the number continues to grow as technology, affordability, and access to this resource improves. The availability of social media groups, forums, mentorship, et cetera, are all efforts to bridge connection among and between hearing professionals and CI recipients as a mentorship of experiences and support.
A case study organized through Tufts School of Medicine equates that “population growth in CI users in the past decade has coincided with an extensive evolution of Internet-based communication patterns, including that of social media” (Saxena). Communication on digital platforms has assisted in bridging the medical, social, and literal hearing barriers that exists for many deaf and hard of hearing people.The profound importance and impact of social media is highlighted as a life-line of interconnection for cochlear implant users, fellow recipients, hearing care professionals, as well as caring friends and family–medically and psychologically.
The three largest cochlear implant companies–Cochlear (most active), Advanced Bionics, and Med-El–are widely active on social media: through Facebook, YouTube, and on their own website forums, discussion groups, and mentorship. Honors Thesis research conducted through the Program in Communication Disorders at the University of Arkansas elaborately details the impacts and usage of social media among Cochlear Implant users, as well as other groups of deaf individuals. A case study of “Social Media Utilization in the Cochlear Implant Community”, conducted by the Tufts School of Medicine (and further collaborations) reveres my own personal belief, supported by medical know-how, that “it is important [for] medical providers to understand the type of health care information available online. [At this time], no previous study has investigated the utilization of social media in the CI community. The role of social media has been studied in ophthalmology, oncology, and psychiatry, but not yet in this specialized community” (Saxena). It is evident that “the CI community engages in the use of a wide range of online social media sources. The CI community utilizes social media for support, advocacy, rehabilitation information, research endeavors, and sharing of personal experiences” (Saxena).
While technology helps bridge particular barriers, there still seems to remain a racial divide in the access to important social media platforms among people with hearing loss. Through study conducted at Gallaudet University, it is revealed that the “prevalence of hearing impairment is greater at all ages among the population living in rural areas, [that the] prevalence of hearing impairment at all ages decreases as family income increases, [and that] in the adult population, the prevalence of hearing impairment is greater for those who are not high school graduates (i.e., have less than 12 years' education) than for high school graduates” (Cole). These three distinctive highlights are not solely particular to the Black demographic, however it does indicate factors which employ historically limiting barriers for minorities, towards being made aware of certain technology, both understanding and accepting a medical condition, accessing resources economically, and therefore being able to maintain a presence across social media platforms to empower this community of the deaf.
A study published in the online Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences “analyzed data from a two-year cycle of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey….[in which] researchers found that about 3% of those with mild hearing loss, 40% of those with moderate loss and about 77% of those with severe loss used hearing aids. They noted that cost may not be a factor, since in the U.K., hearing aids are covered by the National Health service and their rate of hearing aid use is about the same” (Stein). Dually, in contrast, insurance coverage for hearing aid costs is remarkably not available within the U.S., and therefore adds to the disparity of minority hearing aid users–perhaps due to economic circumstances–and in turn allowing a lack of presence across impactful social media that is focused on connecting recipients of cochlear implants.
A considerable backdrop to the issue of minority presence among the hearing impaired is tied to self-reporting, and a lack of making a situation impacting a family member known to doctors and fellow professionals, in order to best assist and provide. A notable observation is that “…15% of non-Hispanic White adults reported some form of hearing difficulty, [while only] 6% of non-Hispanic Black adults…reported hearing problems (Pratt). While some studies do suggest that ethnicities, such as Blacks, do experience less hearing impairment with certain genetic defenses, such as skin pigmentation and inner ear cells (Health Day), it is rather the appropriate acknowledgement that hearing loss is less addressed among minority families and communities, which denies opportunities to youth as well as adults for optimal care and full potential of success.
Importantly, social media technologies helps isolated individuals to access necessary resources, in spite of racial trends of limitation. To further empower the deaf and hard of hearing, social media websites need to continue to be harnessed, to improve provider to patient cooperation, as well as garner positive widespread publicity towards patient (and general) education, about deaf and hard of hearing lifestyles.
Social Media of Cochlear Implants
How has the cochlear implant social media audience evolved, and to what extent has it shaped the communities of deaf culture? Cochlear implants have been received by over 200,000 people in need worldwide, and the number continues to grow as technology, affordability, and access to this resource improves. The availability of social media groups, forums, mentorship, et cetera, are all efforts to bridge connection among and between hearing professionals and CI recipients as a mentorship of experiences and support.
A case study organized through Tufts School of Medicine equates that “population growth in CI users in the past decade has coincided with an extensive evolution of Internet-based communication patterns, including that of social media” (Saxena). Communication on digital platforms has assisted in bridging the medical, social, and literal hearing barriers that exists for many deaf and hard of hearing people.The profound importance and impact of social media is highlighted as a life-line of interconnection for cochlear implant users, fellow recipients, hearing care professionals, as well as caring friends and family–medically and psychologically.
The three largest cochlear implant companies–Cochlear (most active), Advanced Bionics, and Med-El–are widely active on social media: through Facebook, YouTube, and on their own website forums, discussion groups, and mentorship. Honors Thesis research conducted through the Program in Communication Disorders at the University of Arkansas elaborately details the impacts and usage of social media among Cochlear Implant users, as well as other groups of deaf individuals. A case study of “Social Media Utilization in the Cochlear Implant Community”, conducted by the Tufts School of Medicine (and further collaborations) reveres my own personal belief, supported by medical know-how, that “it is important [for] medical providers to understand the type of health care information available online. [At this time], no previous study has investigated the utilization of social media in the CI community. The role of social media has been studied in ophthalmology, oncology, and psychiatry, but not yet in this specialized community” (Saxena). It is evident that “the CI community engages in the use of a wide range of online social media sources. The CI community utilizes social media for support, advocacy, rehabilitation information, research endeavors, and sharing of personal experiences” (Saxena).
While technology helps bridge particular barriers, there still seems to remain a racial divide in the access to important social media platforms among people with hearing loss. Through study conducted at Gallaudet University, it is revealed that the “prevalence of hearing impairment is greater at all ages among the population living in rural areas, [that the] prevalence of hearing impairment at all ages decreases as family income increases, [and that] in the adult population, the prevalence of hearing impairment is greater for those who are not high school graduates (i.e., have less than 12 years' education) than for high school graduates” (Cole). These three distinctive highlights are not solely particular to the Black demographic, however it does indicate factors which employ historically limiting barriers for minorities, towards being made aware of certain technology, both understanding and accepting a medical condition, accessing resources economically, and therefore being able to maintain a presence across social media platforms to empower this community of the deaf.
A study published in the online Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences “analyzed data from a two-year cycle of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey….[in which] researchers found that about 3% of those with mild hearing loss, 40% of those with moderate loss and about 77% of those with severe loss used hearing aids. They noted that cost may not be a factor, since in the U.K., hearing aids are covered by the National Health service and their rate of hearing aid use is about the same” (Stein). Dually, in contrast, insurance coverage for hearing aid costs is remarkably not available within the U.S., and therefore adds to the disparity of minority hearing aid users–perhaps due to economic circumstances–and in turn allowing a lack of presence across impactful social media that is focused on connecting recipients of cochlear implants.
A considerable backdrop to the issue of minority presence among the hearing impaired is tied to self-reporting, and a lack of making a situation impacting a family member known to doctors and fellow professionals, in order to best assist and provide. A notable observation is that “…15% of non-Hispanic White adults reported some form of hearing difficulty, [while only] 6% of non-Hispanic Black adults…reported hearing problems (Pratt). While some studies do suggest that ethnicities, such as Blacks, do experience less hearing impairment with certain genetic defenses, such as skin pigmentation and inner ear cells (Health Day), it is rather the appropriate acknowledgement that hearing loss is less addressed among minority families and communities, which denies opportunities to youth as well as adults for optimal care and full potential of success.
Importantly, social media technologies helps isolated individuals to access necessary resources, in spite of racial trends of limitation. To further empower the deaf and hard of hearing, social media websites need to continue to be harnessed, to improve provider to patient cooperation, as well as garner positive widespread publicity towards patient (and general) education, about deaf and hard of hearing lifestyles.
Bibliography
Bodemann. Margaret A. “Building Interaction with an Isolated Population through Social Media: The Deaf Community”. Honors Thesis. University of Arkansas. 2012. Web. 2 Mar. 2015 <https://uarkive.uark.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10826/ETD-2012-05-231/BODEMANN-THESIS.pdf?sequence=2>.
Cole, Kevin. “Demographic Aspects of Hearing Impairment”. Gallaudet University. 21 Mar. 2012. Web. 20 Apr.2015 <https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/factsheet.php#Q6>.
Goggin, Gerard & Newell, Christopher. “Digital Disability: The Social Construction of Disability in New Media” Rowan & Littlefield Publishers. Google Books. n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2015. <https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=808HMxDE2pYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=social+media+of+cochlear+implants&ots=_gEBCin4CM&sig=YX8dsqmKfQndzSH6muwjf8DZ1wM#v=onepage&q&f=false>.
Health Day. “Hearing Loss Seems to Affect Fewer Blacks Than Whites”. U.S. News. 2 Mar. 2011. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. <http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/articles/2011/03/02/hearing-loss-seems-to-affect-fewer-blacks-than-whites>.
Pratt. Sheila R. U.S. National Library of Medicine. “Prevalence of Hearing Loss in Black and White Elders” <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719023/>.
Saxena, Rajeev C. “Social Media Utilization in the Cochlear Implant Community”. Tufts University School of Medicine. Feb. 2014. Web. 6 Apr. 2015. <http://www.researchposters.com/Posters/AAOHNSF/AAO2014/SP310.pdf>.
Stein, Jeannine. “About two-thirds of older adults may have hearing loss, but blacks could be at lower risk”. Los Angeles Times. 1 Mar. 201. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. <http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/01/news/la-heb-hearing-loss-20110301>.
– Frank