Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-08 03:49:56 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 18BE92771B94248E8D5209248B6F7DAF0D6CEE3FE76C6CDBE1C04EB3D05D105C
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 - 18BE92771B94248E8D5209248B6F7DAF0D6CEE3FE76C6CDBE1C04EB3D05D105C
  • createdAtMillis - 1720410596879
  • 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 - 1
  • ratingsId - 181007098403427567218BE92771B94248E8D5209248B6F7DAF0D6CEE3FE76C6CDBE1C04EB3D05D105C