ArticlePeerJ2017
Exploring biomedical ontology mappings with graph theory methods.
Article in PeerJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The algebraic extended atom-type graph-based model for precise ligand-receptor binding affinity prediction.Journal of cheminformatics · 2025Article
- G Protein-Coupled Receptor Systems and Their Role in Cellular Senescence.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the era of semantic web, life science ontologies play an important role in tasks such as annotating biological objects, linking relevant data pieces, and verifying data consistency. Understanding ontology structures and overlapping ontologies is essential for tasks such as ontology reuse and development. We present an exploratory study where we examine structure and look for patterns in BioPortal, a comprehensive publicly available repository of live science ontologies.
methodsWe report an analysis of biomedical ontology mapping data over time. We apply graph theory methods such as Modularity Analysis and Betweenness Centrality to analyse data gathered at five different time points. We identify communities, i.e., sets of overlapping ontologies, and define similar and closest communities. We demonstrate evolution of identified communities over time and identify core ontologies of the closest communities. We use BioPortal project and category data to measure community coherence. We also validate identified communities with their mutual mentions in scientific literature.
resultsWith comparing mapping data gathered at five different time points, we identified similar and closest communities of overlapping ontologies, and demonstrated evolution of communities over time. Results showed that anatomy and health ontologies tend to form more isolated communities compared to other categories. We also showed that communities contain all or the majority of ontologies being used in narrower projects. In addition, we identified major changes in mapping data after migration to BioPortal Version 4.
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.