Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-31 07:06:27 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 49BF3CE85942DA914876A78581E9B56B4A56D04D7045B03C1A8FF6741145C8C2
Participant Details

Original Note:

The Nakahara cardiac PET study should not be interpreted in this way and has several limitations- it cannot be directly extrapolated to cardiac work. https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.232244

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1752379257966178642
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 49BF3CE85942DA914876A78581E9B56B4A56D04D7045B03C1A8FF6741145C8C2
  • createdAtMillis - 1706684787168
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 175237925796617864249BF3CE85942DA914876A78581E9B56B4A56D04D7045B03C1A8FF6741145C8C2