Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25068035›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical semantics2014

The Software Ontology (SWO): a resource for reproducibility in biomedical data analysis, curation and digital preservation.

James Malone, Andy Brown, Allyson L Lister, Jon Ison, Duncan Hull, Helen Parkinson, Robert Stevens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical semantics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Application of an ontology for model cards to generate computable artifacts for linking machine learning information from biomedical research.Proceedings of the ... International World-Wide Web Conference. International WWW Conference · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

James MaloneEMBL-EBI, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK.
Andy BrownSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Allyson L ListerSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Jon IsonEMBL-EBI, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK.
Duncan HullSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Helen ParkinsonEMBL-EBI, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK.
Robert StevensSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationBiomedical ontologists to date have concentrated on ontological descriptions of biomedical entities such as gene products and their attributes, phenotypes and so on. Recently, effort has diversified to descriptions of the laboratory investigations by which these entities were produced. However, much biological insight is gained from the analysis of the data produced from these investigations, and there is a lack of adequate descriptions of the wide range of software that are central to bioinformatics. We need to describe how data are analyzed for discovery, audit trails, provenance and reproducibility.

resultsThe Software Ontology (SWO) is a description of software used to store, manage and analyze data. Input to the SWO has come from beyond the life sciences, but its main focus is the life sciences. We used agile techniques to gather input for the SWO and keep engagement with our users. The result is an ontology that meets the needs of a broad range of users by describing software, its information processing tasks, data inputs and outputs, data formats versions and so on. Recently, the SWO has incorporated EDAM, a vocabulary for describing data and related concepts in bioinformatics. The SWO is currently being used to describe software used in multiple biomedical applications.

conclusionThe SWO is another element of the biomedical ontology landscape that is necessary for the description of biomedical entities and how they were discovered. An ontology of software used to analyze data produced by investigations in the life sciences can be made in such a way that it covers the important features requested and prioritized by its users. The SWO thus fits into the landscape of biomedical ontologies and is produced using techniques designed to keep it in line with user's needs. AVAILABILITY: The Software Ontology is available under an Apache 2.0 license at http://theswo.sourceforge.net/; the Software Ontology blog can be read at http://softwareontology.wordpress.com.

Identifiers

PMID25068035
PMCPMC4098953

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.