ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2019
A new approach and gold standard toward author disambiguation in MEDLINE.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- PubMed Computed Authors in 2024: an open resource of disambiguated author names in biomedical literature.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Bridging the gap in author names: building an enhanced author name dataset for biomedical literature system.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Notes on the data quality of bibliographic records from the MEDLINE database.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2023Article
- ReCiter: An open source, identity-driven, authorship prediction algorithm optimized for academic institutions.PloS one · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAuthor-centric analyses of fast-growing biomedical reference databases are challenging due to author ambiguity. This problem has been mainly addressed through author disambiguation using supervised machine-learning algorithms. Such algorithms, however, require adequately designed gold standards that reflect the reference database properly. In this study we used MEDLINE to build the first unbiased gold standard in a reference database and improve over the existing state of the art in author disambiguation. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing a new corpus design method, publication pairs randomly picked from MEDLINE were evaluated by both crowdsourcing and expert curators. Because the latter showed higher accuracy than crowdsourcing, expert curators were tasked to create a full corpus. The corpus was then used to explore new features that could improve state-of-the-art author disambiguation algorithms that would not have been discoverable with previously existing gold standards.
resultsWe created a gold standard based on 1900 publication pairs that shows close similarity to MEDLINE in terms of chronological distribution and information completeness. A machine-learning algorithm that includes new features related to the ethnic origin of authors showed significant improvements over the current state of the art and demonstrates the necessity of realistic gold standards to further develop effective author disambiguation algorithms. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionAn unbiased gold standard can give a more accurate picture of the status of author disambiguation research and help in the discovery of new features for machine learning. The principles and methods shown here can be applied to other reference databases beyond MEDLINE. The gold standard and code used for this study are available at the following repository: https://github.com/amorgani/AND/.
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.