Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30937439›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2019

Open Agile text mining for bioinformatics: the PubAnnotation ecosystem.

Jin-Dong Kim, Yue Wang, Toyofumi Fujiwara, Shujiro Okuda, Tiffany J Callahan, K Bretonnel Cohen

Open access · hybridAbstract 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 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Jin-Dong KimDatabase Center for Life Science, Research Organization of Information and Systems, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Yue WangDatabase Center for Life Science, Research Organization of Information and Systems, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Toyofumi FujiwaraDatabase Center for Life Science, Research Organization of Information and Systems, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Shujiro OkudaGraduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata University, Niigata, Japan.
Tiffany J CallahanComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Denver, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
K Bretonnel CohenComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Denver, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Research Organization of Information and Systems · JPNiigata University · JPUniversité Paris-Saclay · FRUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · US

Funding

Computational Bioscience Program Training GrantT15LM009451 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Katherina Kechris-Mays, Arjun Krishnan · 2007 to 2026
$11.7M
Bio Text NLPR01LM009254 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI HUNTER, LAWRENCE E · 2006 to 2018
$5.9M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009254NLM NIH HHS T15 LM009451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationMost currently available text mining tools share two characteristics that make them less than optimal for use by biomedical researchers: they require extensive specialist skills in natural language processing and they were built on the assumption that they should optimize global performance metrics on representative datasets. This is a problem because most end-users are not natural language processing specialists and because biomedical researchers often care less about global metrics like F-measure or representative datasets than they do about more granular metrics such as precision and recall on their own specialized datasets. Thus, there are fundamental mismatches between the assumptions of much text mining work and the preferences of potential end-users.

resultsThis article introduces the concept of Agile text mining, and presents the PubAnnotation ecosystem as an example implementation. The system approaches the problems from two perspectives: it allows the reformulation of text mining by biomedical researchers from the task of assembling a complete system to the task of retrieving warehoused annotations, and it makes it possible to do very targeted customization of the pre-existing system to address specific end-user requirements. Two use cases are presented: assisted curation of the GlycoEpitope database, and assessing coverage in the literature of pre-eclampsia-associated genes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The three tools that make up the ecosystem, PubAnnotation, PubDictionaries and TextAE are publicly available as web services, and also as open source projects. The dictionaries and the annotation datasets associated with the use cases are all publicly available through PubDictionaries and PubAnnotation, respectively.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyEcosystemData MiningFemaleHumansNatural Language ProcessingPregnancyPubMed

Identifiers

PMID30937439
PMCPMC6821251
OpenAlexW2930950231

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.