Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-22 23:23:42 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 16C4B8C971A37037B796D17488DD1663E2DF7093DBA904E418643DD575B49A35
Participant Details

Original Note:

Studies were not "arbitrarily ignored". As stated in the review there were concerns about sample size, representativeness of treatment and control groups, short follow-up and confounding factors. The authors still conclude that the evidence suggests psychological improvements. https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/04/09/archdischild-2023-326670

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1782046876776214617
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 16C4B8C971A37037B796D17488DD1663E2DF7093DBA904E418643DD575B49A35
  • createdAtMillis - 1713828222838
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 178204687677621461716C4B8C971A37037B796D17488DD1663E2DF7093DBA904E418643DD575B49A35