Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-09 11:21:04 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0A25FC959636F92DC0EE2795616CE8AFD99C8889059589257EB5CB3DE1B2E495
Participant Details

Original Note:

The article is published in the 'Correspondence' section of The Lancet, which is dedicated to "Our readers’ reflections on content published in the Lancet journals or on other topics of general interest to our readers. These letters are not normally externally peer reviewed." https://www.thelancet.com/what-we-publish

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1810070984034275672
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0A25FC959636F92DC0EE2795616CE8AFD99C8889059589257EB5CB3DE1B2E495
  • createdAtMillis - 1720524064245
  • 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 - 18100709840342756720A25FC959636F92DC0EE2795616CE8AFD99C8889059589257EB5CB3DE1B2E495