Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-28 08:24:38 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: A38F7E1E13A38F6F89D3CA63C54600656BCCAD9E62B937FA4B1E6E378D93D6A8
Participant Details

Original Note:

The original care pathway was driven by the political views of the clinicians running the service. Care was rated as inadequate. There was no evidence of benefit even from their own research project, and the Tavistock was criticised by the High Court for withholding data. https://users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/Biggs_ExperimentPubertyBlockers.pdf https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj.q742 https://www.bmj.com/content/378/bmj.o2016/rr

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1772968022338048149
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - A38F7E1E13A38F6F89D3CA63C54600656BCCAD9E62B937FA4B1E6E378D93D6A8
  • createdAtMillis - 1711614278002
  • 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 - 1772968022338048149A38F7E1E13A38F6F89D3CA63C54600656BCCAD9E62B937FA4B1E6E378D93D6A8