Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-16 13:24:41 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0C56CC61A63E894683D54293D36B06009C0E3233C592C74BB51C4098FC343019
Participant Details

Original Note:

L'affirmation dans le tweet est incorrecte. L'étude en question ne mentionne pas l'utilisation d'eau par les scientifiques pour tester les protections menstruelles. L'étude se concentre sur les différentes méthodes de protection en termes d'absorption en utilisant du sang. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37550075/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1691792840022458680
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0C56CC61A63E894683D54293D36B06009C0E3233C592C74BB51C4098FC343019
  • createdAtMillis - 1692192281745
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16917928400224586800C56CC61A63E894683D54293D36B06009C0E3233C592C74BB51C4098FC343019