Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18433469›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2008

Extraction of semantic biomedical relations from text using conditional random fields.

Markus Bundschus, Mathaeus Dejori, Martin Stetter, Volker Tresp, Hans-Peter Kriegel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Building a large gene expression-cancer knowledge base with limited human annotations.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. PCOSKBScientific reports · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Markus BundschusSiemens AG, Corporate Technology, Information and Communications, Otto-Hahn-Ring 6, 81739 Munich, Germany. bundschu@dbs.ifi.lmu.de
Mathaeus Dejori
Martin Stetter
Volker Tresp
Hans-Peter Kriegel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing amount of published literature in biomedicine represents an immense source of knowledge, which can only efficiently be accessed by a new generation of automated information extraction tools. Named entity recognition of well-defined objects, such as genes or proteins, has achieved a sufficient level of maturity such that it can form the basis for the next step: the extraction of relations that exist between the recognized entities. Whereas most early work focused on the mere detection of relations, the classification of the type of relation is also of great importance and this is the focus of this work. In this paper we describe an approach that extracts both the existence of a relation and its type. Our work is based on Conditional Random Fields, which have been applied with much success to the task of named entity recognition.

resultsWe benchmark our approach on two different tasks. The first task is the identification of semantic relations between diseases and treatments. The available data set consists of manually annotated PubMed abstracts. The second task is the identification of relations between genes and diseases from a set of concise phrases, so-called GeneRIF (Gene Reference Into Function) phrases. In our experimental setting, we do not assume that the entities are given, as is often the case in previous relation extraction work. Rather the extraction of the entities is solved as a subproblem. Compared with other state-of-the-art approaches, we achieve very competitive results on both data sets. To demonstrate the scalability of our solution, we apply our approach to the complete human GeneRIF database. The resulting gene-disease network contains 34758 semantic associations between 4939 genes and 1745 diseases. The gene-disease network is publicly available as a machine-readable RDF graph.

conclusionWe extend the framework of Conditional Random Fields towards the annotation of semantic relations from text and apply it to the biomedical domain. Our approach is based on a rich set of textual features and achieves a performance that is competitive to leading approaches. The model is quite general and can be extended to handle arbitrary biological entities and relation types. The resulting gene-disease network shows that the GeneRIF database provides a rich knowledge source for text mining. Current work is focused on improving the accuracy of detection of entities as well as entity boundaries, which will also greatly improve the relation extraction performance.

Indexed as

Database Management SystemsNatural Language ProcessingBiomedical ResearchDatabases, GeneticDiseaseGenesHumansMEDLINEModels, StatisticalSemanticsSequence AnalysisTerminology as TopicTherapeuticsVocabulary, Controlled

Identifiers

PMID18433469
PMCPMC2386138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.