ArticleInternational journal on Semantic Web and information systems2007
Experience in Aligning Anatomical Ontologies.
Article in International journal on Semantic Web and information systems, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Logical definition-based identification of potential missing concepts in SNOMED CT.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Sequential Mapping - A Novel Approach to Map from ICD-10-CM to ICD-11.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2022Article
- A review of auditing techniques for the Unified Medical Language System.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Review
- Biomedical ontology alignment: an approach based on representation learning.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2018Article
- Matching biomedical ontologies based on formal concept analysis.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2018Article
- A semi-automatic semantic method for mapping SNOMED CT concepts to VCM Icons.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2013Article
- Uberon, an integrative multi-species anatomy ontology.Genome biology · 2012Article
- An open annotation ontology for science on web 3.0.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2011Article
- Source authenticity in the UMLS--a case study of the Minimal Standard Terminology.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2010Article
- Identifying Granularity Differences between Large Biomedical Ontologies through Rules.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2010Article
- Leveraging biomedical ontologies and annotation services to organize microbiome data from Mammalian hosts.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2010Article
- Proposed Algorithm with Standard Terminologies (SNOMED and CPT) for Automated Generation of Medical Bills for Laboratory Tests.Healthcare informatics research · 2010Article
- Entity/quality-based logical definitions for the human skeletal phenome using PATO.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2009Article
- Issues in mapping LOINC laboratory tests to SNOMED CT.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2008Article
- Identifying mismatches in alignments of large anatomical ontologies.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2007Article
- Lessons learned from cross-validating alignments between large anatomical ontologies.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An ontology is a formal representation of a domain modeling the entities in the domain and their relations. When a domain is represented by multiple ontologies, there is need for creating mappings among these ontologies in order to facilitate the integration of data annotated with these ontologies and reasoning across ontologies. The objective of this paper is to recapitulate our experience in aligning large anatomical ontologies and to reflect on some of the issues and challenges encountered along the way. The four anatomical ontologies under investigation are the Foundational Model of Anatomy, GALEN, the Adult Mouse Anatomical Dictionary and the NCI Thesaurus. Their underlying representation formalisms are all different. Our approach to aligning concepts (directly) is automatic, rule-based, and operates at the schema level, generating mostly point-to-point mappings. It uses a combination of domain-specific lexical techniques and structural and semantic techniques (to validate the mappings suggested lexically). It also takes advantage of domain-specific knowledge (lexical knowledge from external resources such as the Unified Medical Language System, as well as knowledge augmentation and inference techniques). In addition to point-to-point mapping of concepts, we present the alignment of relationships and the mapping of concepts group-to-group. We have also successfully tested an indirect alignment through a domain-specific reference ontology. We present an evaluation of our techniques, both against a gold standard established manually and against a generic schema matching system. The advantages and limitations of our approach are analyzed and discussed throughout the paper.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.