ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2016
The Markyt visualisation, prediction and benchmark platform for chemical and gene entity recognition at BioCreative/CHEMDNER challenge.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2016. 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.
- TeamTat: a collaborative text annotation tool.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Automatic identification of relevant chemical compounds from patents.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2019Article
- Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: The Seek & Blastn tool.PloS one · 2019Article
- The BioC-BioGRID corpus: full text articles annotated for curation of protein-protein and genetic interactions.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2017Article
- Collaborative relation annotation and quality analysis in Markyt environment.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomedical text mining methods and technologies have improved significantly in the last decade. Considerable efforts have been invested in understanding the main challenges of biomedical literature retrieval and extraction and proposing solutions to problems of practical interest. Most notably, community-oriented initiatives such as the BioCreative challenge have enabled controlled environments for the comparison of automatic systems while pursuing practical biomedical tasks. Under this scenario, the present work describes the Markyt Web-based document curation platform, which has been implemented to support the visualisation, prediction and benchmark of chemical and gene mention annotations at BioCreative/CHEMDNER challenge. Creating this platform is an important step for the systematic and public evaluation of automatic prediction systems and the reusability of the knowledge compiled for the challenge. Markyt was not only critical to support the manual annotation and annotation revision process but also facilitated the comparative visualisation of automated results against the manually generated Gold Standard annotations and comparative assessment of generated results. We expect that future biomedical text mining challenges and the text mining community may benefit from the Markyt platform to better explore and interpret annotations and improve automatic system predictions.Database URL: http://www.markyt.org, https://github.com/sing-group/Markyt.
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.