ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2010
Source authenticity in the UMLS--a case study of the Minimal Standard Terminology.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As the UMLS integrates multiple source vocabularies, the integration process requires that certain adaptation be applied to the source. Our interest is in examining the relationship between the UMLS representation of a source vocabulary and the source vocabulary itself. We investigated the integration of the Minimal Standard Terminology (MST) into the UMLS in order to examine how close its UMLS representation is to the source MST. The MST was conceived as a "minimal" list of terms and structure intended for use within computer systems to facilitate standardized reporting of gastrointestinal endoscopic examinations. Although the MST has an overall schema and implied relationship structure, many of the UMLS integrated MST terms were found to be hierarchically orphaned, and with lateral relationships that do not closely adhere to the source MST. Thus, the MST representation within the UMLS significantly differs from that of the source MST. These representation discrepancies may affect the usability of the MST representation in the UMLS for knowledge acquisition. Furthermore, they pose a problem from the perspective of application developers. While these findings may not necessarily apply to other source terminologies, they highlight the conflict between preservation of authentic concept orientation and the UMLS overall desire to provide fully specified names for all source terms.
Indexed as
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.