ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2019
Using association rule mining and ontologies to generate metadata recommendations from multiple biomedical databases.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Understanding the Nature of Metadata: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- FAIR foundations of a novel indicator vault for non-communicable diseases in the European Union: feasibility study for effective contextualisation of indicators.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- ARGem: a new metagenomics pipeline for antibiotic resistance genes: metadata, analysis, and visualization.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- A novel FCTF evaluation and prediction model for food efficacy based on association rule mining.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- Modeling community standards for metadata as templates makes data FAIR.Scientific data · 2022Article
- SKIOME Project: a curated collection of skin microbiome datasets enriched with study-related metadata.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2022Article
- MITI minimum information guidelines for highly multiplexed tissue images.Nature methods · 2022Article
- An open-source framework for neuroscience metadata management applied to digital reconstructions of neuronal morphology.Brain informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Metadata-the machine-readable descriptions of the data-are increasingly seen as crucial for describing the vast array of biomedical datasets that are currently being deposited in public repositories. While most public repositories have firm requirements that metadata must accompany submitted datasets, the quality of those metadata is generally very poor. A key problem is that the typical metadata acquisition process is onerous and time consuming, with little interactive guidance or assistance provided to users. Secondary problems include the lack of validation and sparse use of standardized terms or ontologies when authoring metadata. There is a pressing need for improvements to the metadata acquisition process that will help users to enter metadata quickly and accurately. In this paper, we outline a recommendation system for metadata that aims to address this challenge. Our approach uses association rule mining to uncover hidden associations among metadata values and to represent them in the form of association rules. These rules are then used to present users with real-time recommendations when authoring metadata. The novelties of our method are that it is able to combine analyses of metadata from multiple repositories when generating recommendations and can enhance those recommendations by aligning them with ontology terms. We implemented our approach as a service integrated into the CEDAR Workbench metadata authoring platform, and evaluated it using metadata from two public biomedical repositories: US-based National Center for Biotechnology Information BioSample and European Bioinformatics Institute BioSamples. The results show that our approach is able to use analyses of previously entered metadata coupled with ontology-based mappings to present users with accurate recommendations when authoring metadata.
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.