ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2011
Automatic figure classification in bioscience literature.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compound image segmentation of published biomedical figures.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Segmenting Compound Biomedical Figures into Their Constituent Panels.Experimental IR meets multilinguality, multimodality, and interaction : 8th International Conference of the CLEF Association, CLEF 2017, Dublin, Ireland, September 11-14, 2017, Proceedings. Cross-Language Evaluation Forum. Conference · 2017Article
- DeTEXT: A Database for Evaluating Text Extraction from Biomedical Literature Figures.PloS one · 2015Article
- Novel image markers for non-small cell lung cancer classification and survival prediction.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
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
Millions of figures appear in biomedical articles, and it is important to develop an intelligent figure search engine to return relevant figures based on user entries. In this study we report a figure classifier that automatically classifies biomedical figures into five predefined figure types: Gel-image, Image-of-thing, Graph, Model, and Mix. The classifier explored rich image features and integrated them with text features. We performed feature selection and explored different classification models, including a rule-based figure classifier, a supervised machine-learning classifier, and a multi-model classifier, the latter of which integrated the first two classifiers. Our results show that feature selection improved figure classification and the novel image features we explored were the best among image features that we have examined. Our results also show that integrating text and image features achieved better performance than using either of them individually. The best system is a multi-model classifier which combines the rule-based hierarchical classifier and a support vector machine (SVM) based classifier, achieving a 76.7% F1-score for five-type classification. We demonstrated our system at http://figureclassification.askhermes.org/.
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.