Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-08 00:05:55 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 72387AFCD77BAE7D32AD959FA6869F1BC41C2282A20EB42148ED2BB3897A795A
Participant Details

Original Note:

This article is NOT an estimate from The Lancet. It is clearly shown as "Correspondence" - "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 https://x.com/supertolerant/status/1810094865671131618

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1810101257995981005
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 72387AFCD77BAE7D32AD959FA6869F1BC41C2282A20EB42148ED2BB3897A795A
createdAtMillis - 1720397155337
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 - 181010125799598100572387AFCD77BAE7D32AD959FA6869F1BC41C2282A20EB42148ED2BB3897A795A