Birdwatch Note
2024-10-14 07:10:10 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
The CASS review has not been discredited and it was not a research study that needed to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewed research studies were included within the review amongst other methodologies. https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2024/07/why-are-british-doctors-voting-to-reject-the-cass-report https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/mental-health-pain-and-addiction/bma-will-approach-cass-review-neutrally-after-vote-overturns-critical-stance/ https://cass.independent-review.uk/about-the-review/frequently-asked-questions/
Written by 0B3A25A160F5CD87C436C627B1490B6679ADBF937CCDA1C7D906A7BE24E4D935
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1845187286729883986
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1845723756251037849
- noteId - 1845723756251037849
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 0B3A25A160F5CD87C436C627B1490B6679ADBF937CCDA1C7D906A7BE24E4D935 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1728889810036
- tweetId - 1845187286729883986
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- The CASS review has not been discredited and it was not a research study that needed to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewed research studies were included within the review amongst other methodologies. https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2024/07/why-are-british-doctors-voting-to-reject-the-cass-report https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/mental-health-pain-and-addiction/bma-will-approach-cass-review-neutrally-after-vote-overturns-critical-stance/ https://cass.independent-review.uk/about-the-review/frequently-asked-questions/
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2024-10-14 02:21:23 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-10-14 02:24:07 -0500 | Rating Details |