Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30304355›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2019

LION LBD: a literature-based discovery system for cancer biology.

Sampo Pyysalo, Simon Baker, Imran Ali, Stefan Haselwimmer, Tejas Shah, Andrew Young, Yufan Guo, Johan Högberg, Ulla Stenius, Masashi Narita and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Learning to Rank Complex Biomedical Hypotheses for Accelerating Scientific Discovery.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Sampo PyysaloLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Simon BakerLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Imran AliInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stefan HaselwimmerLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Tejas ShahLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Andrew YoungCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Yufan GuoLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Johan HögbergInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ulla SteniusInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Masashi NaritaCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Anna KorhonenLanguage Technology Lab, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15890Cancer Research UK 24453Medical Research Council MR/M013049/1Medical Research Council MR/R010013/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe overwhelming size and rapid growth of the biomedical literature make it impossible for scientists to read all studies related to their work, potentially leading to missed connections and wasted time and resources. Literature-based discovery (LBD) aims to alleviate these issues by identifying implicit links between disjoint parts of the literature. While LBD has been studied in depth since its introduction three decades ago, there has been limited work making use of recent advances in biomedical text processing methods in LBD.

resultsWe present LION LBD, a literature-based discovery system that enables researchers to navigate published information and supports hypothesis generation and testing. The system is built with a particular focus on the molecular biology of cancer using state-of-the-art machine learning and natural language processing methods, including named entity recognition and grounding to domain ontologies covering a wide range of entity types and a novel approach to detecting references to the hallmarks of cancer in text. LION LBD implements a broad selection of co-occurrence based metrics for analyzing the strength of entity associations, and its design allows real-time search to discover indirect associations between entities in a database of tens of millions of publications while preserving the ability of users to explore each mention in its original context in the literature. Evaluations of the system demonstrate its ability to identify undiscovered links and rank relevant concepts highly among potential connections. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The LION LBD system is available via a web-based user interface and a programmable API, and all components of the system are made available under open licenses from the project home page http://lbd.lionproject.net. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsAlgorithmsDatabases, FactualHumansNatural Language ProcessingPublications

Identifiers

PMID30304355
PMCPMC6499247

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.