Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-26 10:02:17 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 14D397C6F55755F58343505505E906A5C4023A647B9D5D734163BB8590850C25
Participant Details

Original Note:

Um artigo com uma análise bastante limitada não é uma boa fonte. Uma revisão da literatura, mais robusta do que um mero artigo, demonstra exatamente o contrário do que a nota insinua. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292122000885

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1848696717492765115
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 14D397C6F55755F58343505505E906A5C4023A647B9D5D734163BB8590850C25
  • createdAtMillis - 1729936937799
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 184869671749276511514D397C6F55755F58343505505E906A5C4023A647B9D5D734163BB8590850C25