Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-16 18:13:16 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 8C0D3DD598D48BCEB6153A6FFF65C889B97FFD7DFECF8BE870D24948089BF262
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 - 8C0D3DD598D48BCEB6153A6FFF65C889B97FFD7DFECF8BE870D24948089BF262
  • createdAtMillis - 1692209596348
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_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 - 1
  • ratingsId - 16917928400224586808C0D3DD598D48BCEB6153A6FFF65C889B97FFD7DFECF8BE870D24948089BF262