Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-22 21:59:52 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1AA942C0F11C9634D51777A1623F29D9219E805FA01138AE7ACF14355BB7B20F
Participant Details

Original Note:

2% of existing studies found in systematic review were high quality, 50% were moderate quality, 48% were low quality. Only the low quality were rejected (48% NOT 98%). 52% (the high and moderate quality studies) were included in the review. https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/ https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/04/09/archdischild-2023-326669

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1782448146963960094
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1AA942C0F11C9634D51777A1623F29D9219E805FA01138AE7ACF14355BB7B20F
  • createdAtMillis - 1713823192590
  • 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 - 17824481469639600941AA942C0F11C9634D51777A1623F29D9219E805FA01138AE7ACF14355BB7B20F