Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22438567›Full record

ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2012

How to link ontologies and protein-protein interactions to literature: text-mining approaches and the BioCreative experience.

Martin Krallinger, Florian Leitner, Miguel Vazquez, David Salgado, Christophe Marcelle, Mike Tyers, Alfonso Valencia, Andrew Chatr-aryamontri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Assisting manual literature curation for protein-protein interactions using BioQRator.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014
    Article
  8. BioCreative-IV virtual issue.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Polypharmacology: drug discovery for the future.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2013
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Biocuration workflows and text mining: overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track II.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2012
    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

8 authors.

Martin KrallingerStructural and Computational Biology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Spain.
Florian Leitner
Miguel Vazquez
David Salgado
Christophe Marcelle
Mike Tyers
Alfonso Valencia
Andrew Chatr-aryamontri

Funding

BioGRID: An open resource for biological interactions and network analysisR01OD010929 · OD · SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM · PI KARA DOLINSKI, Mike Tyers · 2012 to 2026
$13.9M
BioGRID: an open resource for biological interactions and network analysisR01RR024031 · NCRR · SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM · PI TYERS, MIKE · 2007 to 2011
$3.2M
Systematic data curation and integration to link models of human diseaseR24RR032659 · NCRR · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI DOLINSKI, KARA · 2011 to 2011
$675k
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F010486/1CIHR FRN 82940NCRR NIH HHS 1R01RR024031NCRR NIH HHS R24RR032659NIH HHS R01 OD010929Wellcome Trust 092076
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an increasing interest in developing ontologies and controlled vocabularies to improve the efficiency and consistency of manual literature curation, to enable more formal biocuration workflow results and ultimately to improve analysis of biological data. Two ontologies that have been successfully used for this purpose are the Gene Ontology (GO) for annotating aspects of gene products and the Molecular Interaction ontology (PSI-MI) used by databases that archive protein-protein interactions. The examination of protein interactions has proven to be extremely promising for the understanding of cellular processes. Manual mapping of information from the biomedical literature to bio-ontology terms is one of the most challenging components in the curation pipeline. It requires that expert curators interpret the natural language descriptions contained in articles and infer their semantic equivalents in the ontology (controlled vocabulary). Since manual curation is a time-consuming process, there is strong motivation to implement text-mining techniques to automatically extract annotations from free text. A range of text mining strategies has been devised to assist in the automated extraction of biological data. These strategies either recognize technical terms used recurrently in the literature and propose them as candidates for inclusion in ontologies, or retrieve passages that serve as evidential support for annotating an ontology term, e.g. from the PSI-MI or GO controlled vocabularies. Here, we provide a general overview of current text-mining methods to automatically extract annotations of GO and PSI-MI ontology terms in the context of the BioCreative (Critical Assessment of Information Extraction Systems in Biology) challenge. Special emphasis is given to protein-protein interaction data and PSI-MI terms referring to interaction detection methods.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinMolecular Sequence AnnotationProtein Interaction MappingData MiningNatural Language ProcessingProteomicsVocabulary, Controlled

Identifiers

PMID22438567
PMCPMC3309177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.