Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-08 13:44:45 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: CD6593AFD7F8B45E040A456920A5C06B897779C6E0BCD36DDB1BBE71D133D481
Participant Details

Original Note:

Die Schätzung stammt nicht von The Lancet, sondern aus einem Leserbrief („Correspondence“) an The Lancet. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext Leserbriefe werden von The Lancet ohne Peer Review veröffentlicht und geben nicht die Sichtweise von The Lancet wieder. https://www.thelancet.com/what-we-publish

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1810257711625285761
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - CD6593AFD7F8B45E040A456920A5C06B897779C6E0BCD36DDB1BBE71D133D481
  • createdAtMillis - 1720446285067
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - 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 - 1810257711625285761CD6593AFD7F8B45E040A456920A5C06B897779C6E0BCD36DDB1BBE71D133D481