Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21992002›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011

The BioLexicon: a large-scale terminological resource for biomedical text mining.

Paul Thompson, John McNaught, Simonetta Montemagni, Nicoletta Calzolari, Riccardo del Gratta, Vivian Lee, Simone Marchi, Monica Monachini, Piotr Pezik, Valeria Quochi and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. BioCreative V BioC track overview: collaborative biocurator assistant task for BioGRID.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016
    Article
  8. Event-based text mining for biology and functional genomics.Briefings in functional genomics · 2015
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Processing biological literature with customizable Web services supporting interoperable formats.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Unified Medical Language System term occurrences in clinical notes: a large-scale corpus analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2012
    Article
  18. Article
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

15 authors.

Paul ThompsonSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. paul.thompson@manchester.ac.uk
John McNaught
Simonetta Montemagni
Nicoletta Calzolari
Riccardo del Gratta
Vivian Lee
Simone Marchi
Monica Monachini
Piotr Pezik
Valeria Quochi
C J Rupp
Yutaka Sasaki
Giulia Venturi
Dietrich Rebholz-Schuhmann
Sophia Ananiadou

Funding

Arthritis Research UKBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/G013160/1British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKChief Scientist OfficeDepartment of HealthMedical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

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

Data MiningVocabulary, ControlledComputational BiologyDatabases, FactualHumansSemantics

Identifiers

PMID21992002
PMCPMC3228855

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.