Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-03 21:12:14 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: C111EEE146D8697AC25051B2F430FE68514B9F795DD7966058472D31D4150CBE
Participant Details

Original Note:

This is not how a systematic review is done. You cannot simply combine multiple studies on a spreadsheet without assessing quality of evidence. Taylor et al did carry out a proper review and found high quality evidence was lacking: https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/04/09/archdischild-2023-326670 Other reviews reach similar conclusion: https://cass.independent-review.uk/nice-evidence-reviews/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1797606991889682457
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - C111EEE146D8697AC25051B2F430FE68514B9F795DD7966058472D31D4150CBE
  • createdAtMillis - 1717449134270
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1797606991889682457C111EEE146D8697AC25051B2F430FE68514B9F795DD7966058472D31D4150CBE