Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26218847›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Hedge Scope Detection in Biomedical Texts: An Effective Dependency-Based Method.

Huiwei Zhou, Huijie Deng, Degen Huang, Minling Zhu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Huiwei ZhouSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Huijie DengSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Degen HuangSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
Minling ZhuSchool of Computer, Beijing Information Science and Technology University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsNatural Language ProcessingData MiningHumansLinguistics

Identifiers

PMID26218847
PMCPMC4517914

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.