ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011
Benchmarking of the 2010 BioCreative Challenge III text-mining competition by the BioGRID and MINT interaction databases.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI in biocuration: challenges, opportunities, and a roadmap for sustainable integration.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- Text Mining for Building Biomedical Networks Using Cancer as a Case Study.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- The BioGRID interaction database: 2017 update.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- The BioGRID interaction database: 2015 update.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- Micropublications: a semantic model for claims, evidence, arguments and annotations in biomedical communications.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2014Article
- Article
- The BioGRID interaction database: 2013 update.Nucleic acids research · 2013Article
- How to link ontologies and protein-protein interactions to literature: text-mining approaches and the BioCreative experience.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2012Article
- Overview of the BioCreative III Workshop.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe vast amount of data published in the primary biomedical literature represents a challenge for the automated extraction and codification of individual data elements. Biological databases that rely solely on manual extraction by expert curators are unable to comprehensively annotate the information dispersed across the entire biomedical literature. The development of efficient tools based on natural language processing (NLP) systems is essential for the selection of relevant publications, identification of data attributes and partially automated annotation. One of the tasks of the Biocreative 2010 Challenge III was devoted to the evaluation of NLP systems developed to identify articles for curation and extraction of protein-protein interaction (PPI) data.
resultsThe Biocreative 2010 competition addressed three tasks: gene normalization, article classification and interaction method identification. The BioGRID and MINT protein interaction databases both participated in the generation of the test publication set for gene normalization, annotated the development and test sets for article classification, and curated the test set for interaction method classification. These test datasets served as a gold standard for the evaluation of data extraction algorithms.
conclusionThe development of efficient tools for extraction of PPI data is a necessary step to achieve full curation of the biomedical literature. NLP systems can in the first instance facilitate expert curation by refining the list of candidate publications that contain PPI data; more ambitiously, NLP approaches may be able to directly extract relevant information from full-text articles for rapid inspection by expert curators. Close collaboration between biological databases and NLP systems developers will continue to facilitate the long-term objectives of both disciplines.
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.