Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-22 12:47:00 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 2557FEFF3ADD151FFE7B08F2BC173AED725070D9F87E48ACD7A3932374263270
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 - 2557FEFF3ADD151FFE7B08F2BC173AED725070D9F87E48ACD7A3932374263270
  • createdAtMillis - 1713790020153
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 17820468767762146172557FEFF3ADD151FFE7B08F2BC173AED725070D9F87E48ACD7A3932374263270