Table 2. Distribution and median of rumors in each dimension and the consistency test between two raters .

Dimension		Scores≥50%	Scores<50%	Median% (Q1-Q3)	ICC (95% CI * )
		N	N
1	Creators	17	110	25.00 (16.67-37.50)	0.740 (0.650-0.810)
2	Evidence selection	25	102	27.78 (13.89-44.44)	0.856 (0.801-0.896)
3	Evidence evaluation	12	57a	33.33 (25.00-45.83)c	0.726 (0.591-0.821)c
4	Application of evidence	27	100	36.11 (22.22-47.22)	0.712 (0.614-0.788)
5	Backing and publishing platform	1	126	8.33 (4.17-20.83)	0.779 (0.700-0.839)
6	Conflict of interest	103b	24	75.00 (50.00-83.33)	0.694(0.591-0.774)

* 95%CI means 95% confidence intervals

^a There are 58 rumors that did not quote expert opinions, and those which are recognized as “not applicable” at the time of scoring would not be counted for this dimension.

^b There are 6 rumors that the dimension score is 100%.

^c Rumors which are recognized as “not applicable” in item 8 (Expert opinions without high-level evidence should be carefully quoted in health works) of dimension 3 would not be counted in this dimension.