ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2017
Automated PDF highlighting to support faster curation of literature for Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Developing automated methods for disease subtyping in UK Biobank: an exemplar study on stroke.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease are devastating and costly illnesses, a source of major global burden. In order to provide successful interventions for patients and reduce costs, both causes and pathological processes need to be understood. The ApiNATOMY project aims to contribute to our understanding of neurodegenerative disorders by manually curating and abstracting data from the vast body of literature amassed on these illnesses. As curation is labour-intensive, we aimed to speed up the process by automatically highlighting those parts of the PDF document of primary importance to the curator. Using techniques similar to those of summarisation, we developed an algorithm that relies on linguistic, semantic and spatial features. Employing this algorithm on a test set manually corrected for tool imprecision, we achieved a macro F 1 -measure of 0.51, which is an increase of 132% compared to the best bag-of-words baseline model. A user based evaluation was also conducted to assess the usefulness of the methodology on 40 unseen publications, which reveals that in 85% of cases all highlighted sentences are relevant to the curation task and in about 65% of the cases, the highlights are sufficient to support the knowledge curation task without needing to consult the full text. In conclusion, we believe that these are promising results for a step in automating the recognition of curation-relevant sentences. Refining our approach to pre-digest papers will lead to faster processing and cost reduction in the curation process. Database URL: https://github.com/KHP-Informatics/NapEasy.
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.