Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-19 20:45:27 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 77F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C
Participant Details

Original Note:

Tha author never claims the paper was peer reviewed by the Lancet when it was first published in 2023. He claims the paper was censored and cancelled which it was. It has now been reviewed and should be published again https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehf2.14680

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1803460193163915711
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 77F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C
  • createdAtMillis - 1718829927402
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 180346019316391571177F3621FF8FA173FA4ACD668DF010C276EAE695AC375074FD5F7766FA71A337C