Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-13 08:17:30 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 2CBDFCFCF9F26A90B87F7496DC30C7ADFF1087F79B4D738055C483D6FF89D719
Participant Details

Original Note:

Note must clarify the relationship between the source given and the Cass Review, as it is not one of the systematic reviews listed on page 47 of the Cass Review (which is likely the list referred to by the OP). Until this is clear the source does not support the note. https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1778997570553159718
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 2CBDFCFCF9F26A90B87F7496DC30C7ADFF1087F79B4D738055C483D6FF89D719
  • createdAtMillis - 1712996250442
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17789975705531597182CBDFCFCF9F26A90B87F7496DC30C7ADFF1087F79B4D738055C483D6FF89D719