Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-17 17:30:18 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 4CDFBCA1CEF1DDE2E52E213A3D2C6D9DB1FD408B1F5B072EDB92A7BDC8CADF63
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 - 4CDFBCA1CEF1DDE2E52E213A3D2C6D9DB1FD408B1F5B072EDB92A7BDC8CADF63
  • createdAtMillis - 1692293418708
  • 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 - 16917928400224586804CDFBCA1CEF1DDE2E52E213A3D2C6D9DB1FD408B1F5B072EDB92A7BDC8CADF63