ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011
The BioLexicon: a large-scale terminological resource for biomedical text mining.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- MedLexSp - a medical lexicon for Spanish medical natural language processing.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2023Article
- A survey on clinical natural language processing in the United Kingdom from 2007 to 2022.NPJ digital medicine · 2022Review
- Article
- A neural classification method for supporting the creation of BioVerbNet.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2019Article
- Constructing a biodiversity terminological inventory.PloS one · 2017Article
- BioCreative V BioC track overview: collaborative biocurator assistant task for BioGRID.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016Article
- Event-based text mining for biology and functional genomics.Briefings in functional genomics · 2015Review
- Quantifying the impact and extent of undocumented biomedical synonymy.PLoS computational biology · 2014Article
- EXACT2: the semantics of biomedical protocols.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Processing biological literature with customizable Web services supporting interoperable formats.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014Article
- Evaluating gold standard corpora against gene/protein tagging solutions and lexical resources.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2013Article
- A modular framework for biomedical concept recognition.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- Application of information retrieval approaches to case classification in the vaccine adverse event reporting system.Drug safety · 2013Article
- Article
- Mining the pharmacogenomics literature--a survey of the state of the art.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2012Article
- Unified Medical Language System term occurrences in clinical notes: a large-scale corpus analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2012Article
- BioLemmatizer: a lemmatization tool for morphological processing of biomedical text.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDue to the rapidly expanding body of biomedical literature, biologists require increasingly sophisticated and efficient systems to help them to search for relevant information. Such systems should account for the multiple written variants used to represent biomedical concepts, and allow the user to search for specific pieces of knowledge (or events) involving these concepts, e.g., protein-protein interactions. Such functionality requires access to detailed information about words used in the biomedical literature. Existing databases and ontologies often have a specific focus and are oriented towards human use. Consequently, biological knowledge is dispersed amongst many resources, which often do not attempt to account for the large and frequently changing set of variants that appear in the literature. Additionally, such resources typically do not provide information about how terms relate to each other in texts to describe events.
resultsThis article provides an overview of the design, construction and evaluation of a large-scale lexical and conceptual resource for the biomedical domain, the BioLexicon. The resource can be exploited by text mining tools at several levels, e.g., part-of-speech tagging, recognition of biomedical entities, and the extraction of events in which they are involved. As such, the BioLexicon must account for real usage of words in biomedical texts. In particular, the BioLexicon gathers together different types of terms from several existing data resources into a single, unified repository, and augments them with new term variants automatically extracted from biomedical literature. Extraction of events is facilitated through the inclusion of biologically pertinent verbs (around which events are typically organized) together with information about typical patterns of grammatical and semantic behaviour, which are acquired from domain-specific texts. In order to foster interoperability, the BioLexicon is modelled using the Lexical Markup Framework, an ISO standard.
conclusionsThe BioLexicon contains over 2.2 M lexical entries and over 1.8 M terminological variants, as well as over 3.3 M semantic relations, including over 2 M synonymy relations. Its exploitation can benefit both application developers and users. We demonstrate some such benefits by describing integration of the resource into a number of different tools, and evaluating improvements in performance that this can bring.
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.