Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-09 00:44:12 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: A144A3097AC9A6CEE789E376FBA4F6EC35791588BB10E4A1DA62DE6826ADDE14
Participant Details

Original Note:

Contrary to the OP's argument, The Lancet did not make such claim. They published a Correspondence, an equivalent to a Letter to the Editor. The piece in question wasn't peer-reviewed, the figures and claims in it aren't verified, and can be attributed solely to the authors. https://www.thelancet.com/what-we-publish

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1810283736589574355
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - A144A3097AC9A6CEE789E376FBA4F6EC35791588BB10E4A1DA62DE6826ADDE14
  • createdAtMillis - 1720485852703
  • 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 - 1
  • 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 - 1810283736589574355A144A3097AC9A6CEE789E376FBA4F6EC35791588BB10E4A1DA62DE6826ADDE14