Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27001195›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2016

Improving the utility of MeSH® terms using the TopicalMeSH representation.

Zhiguo Yu, Elmer Bernstam, Trevor Cohen, Byron C Wallace, Todd R Johnson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Zhiguo YuSchool of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Elmer BernstamSchool of Biomedical Informatics and Department of Internal Medicine, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Trevor CohenSchool of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Byron C WallaceSchool of Information, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Todd R JohnsonSchool of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: Todd.R.Johnson@uth.tmc.edu.

Funding

Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS)UL1TR000371 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MCPHERSON, DAVID D · 2012 to 2016
$13.4M
Semi-Automating Data Extraction for Systematic ReviewsR01LM012086 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI MARSHALL, IAIN, WALLACE, BYRON CASEY · 2015 to 2022
$2.4M
Informatics to enable routine personalized cancer therapyU01CA180964 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI BERNSTAM, ELMER V., MERIC-BERNSTAM, FUNDA · 2013 to 2015
$964k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000371NCI NIH HHS U01 CA180964NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012086
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate whether vector representations encoding latent topic proportions that capture similarities to MeSH terms can improve performance on biomedical document retrieval and classification tasks, compared to using MeSH terms. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe developed the TopicalMeSH representation, which exploits the 'correspondence' between topics generated using latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) and MeSH terms to create new document representations that combine MeSH terms and latent topic vectors. We used 15 systematic drug review corpora to evaluate performance on information retrieval and classification tasks using this TopicalMeSH representation, compared to using standard encodings that rely on either (1) the original MeSH terms, (2) the text, or (3) their combination. For the document retrieval task, we compared the precision and recall achieved by ranking citations using MeSH and TopicalMeSH representations, respectively. For the classification task, we considered three supervised machine learning approaches, Support Vector Machines (SVMs), logistic regression, and decision trees. We used these to classify documents as relevant or irrelevant using (independently) MeSH, TopicalMeSH, Words (i.e., n-grams extracted from citation titles and abstracts, encoded via bag-of-words representation), a combination of MeSH and Words, and a combination of TopicalMeSH and Words. We also used SVM to compare the classification performance of tf-idf weighted MeSH terms, LDA Topics, a combination of Topics and MeSH, and TopicalMeSH to supervised LDA's classification performance.

resultsFor the document retrieval task, using the TopicalMeSH representation resulted in higher precision than MeSH in 11 of 15 corpora while achieving the same recall. For the classification task, use of TopicalMeSH features realized a higher F1 score in 14 of 15 corpora when used by SVMs, 12 of 15 corpora using logistic regression, and 12 of 15 corpora using decision trees. TopicalMeSH also had better document classification performance on 12 of 15 corpora when compared to Topics, tf-idf weighted MeSH terms, and a combination of Topics and MeSH using SVMs. Supervised LDA achieved the worst performance in most of the corpora.

conclusionThe proposed TopicalMeSH representation (which combines MeSH terms with latent topics) consistently improved performance on document retrieval and classification tasks, compared to using alternative standard representations using MeSH terms alone, as well as, several standard alternative approaches.

Indexed as

Information Storage and RetrievalMedical Subject HeadingsSupport Vector MachineDecision TreesHumansDocument classificationDocument retrievalMeSHPubMedTopic models

Identifiers

PMID27001195
PMCPMC4893983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.