Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-22 09:41:47 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3482F33955540F0FDDCDD5068B3F886F3F4992D83B213800EE63ECD80A3EFA64
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN - Post makes a factually correct statement. The report was initially removed by The Lancet due to issues in the methodology used. Further work was done to align with appropriate methodology and is currently an accepted and peer reviewed article as of June 21, 2024. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073824001968?via%3Dihub

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1804340647207539034
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3482F33955540F0FDDCDD5068B3F886F3F4992D83B213800EE63ECD80A3EFA64
  • createdAtMillis - 1719049307113
  • 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 - 18043406472075390343482F33955540F0FDDCDD5068B3F886F3F4992D83B213800EE63ECD80A3EFA64