ArticlePloS one2015
Hedge Scope Detection in Biomedical Texts: An Effective Dependency-Based Method.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creating an ignorance-base: Exploring known unknowns in the scientific literature.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- Negation and uncertainty detection in clinical texts written in Spanish: a deep learning-based approach.PeerJ. Computer science · 2022Article
- Article
- Improving the Path from Diagnoses to Documentation: A Cognitive Review Tool for Clinical Notes and Administrative Records.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2018Article
- Using uncertainty to link and rank evidence from biomedical literature for model curation.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hedge detection is used to distinguish uncertain information from facts, which is of essential importance in biomedical information extraction. The task of hedge detection is often divided into two subtasks: detecting uncertain cues and their linguistic scope. Hedge scope is a sequence of tokens including the hedge cue in a sentence. Previous hedge scope detection methods usually take all tokens in a sentence as candidate boundaries, which inevitably generate a large number of negatives for classifiers. The imbalanced instances seriously mislead classifiers and result in lower performance. This paper proposes a dependency-based candidate boundary selection method (DCBS), which selects the most likely tokens as candidate boundaries and removes the exceptional tokens which have less potential to improve the performance based on dependency tree. In addition, we employ the composite kernel to integrate lexical and syntactic information and demonstrate the effectiveness of structured syntactic features for hedge scope detection. Experiments on the CoNLL-2010 Shared Task corpus show that our method achieves 71.92% F1-score on the golden standard cues, which is 4.11% higher than the system without using DCBS. Although the candidate boundary selection method is only evaluated on hedge scope detection here, it can be popularized to other kinds of scope learning tasks.
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.