Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-08 19:54:58 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0EF6E501CAEC2C3B3290FB5F663AC40AEAA22DF3F82A3D311EB45ECB00AB88CC
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 - 0EF6E501CAEC2C3B3290FB5F663AC40AEAA22DF3F82A3D311EB45ECB00AB88CC
  • createdAtMillis - 1720468498295
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 18100709840342756720EF6E501CAEC2C3B3290FB5F663AC40AEAA22DF3F82A3D311EB45ECB00AB88CC