ReviewJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020
A review of auditing techniques for the Unified Medical Language System.
Review in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Use of Controlled Terminologies, Ontologies, and Vocabularies for Evidence Generation Across a Large International Observational Network: Challenges and Lessons Learned From a Mixed Method Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Development of a large language model-based knowledge graph for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in breast cancer and its implications for nursing.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Article
- Natural language processing reveals network structure of pain communication in social media using discrete mathematical analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- On the role of the UMLS in supporting diagnosis generation proposed by Large Language Models.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2024Article
- Special supplement issue on quality assurance and enrichment of biological and biomedical ontologies and terminologies.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Two complementary AI approaches for predicting UMLS semantic group assignment: heuristic reasoning and deep learning.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- A GCN-based approach to uncover misaligned synonymous terms in the UMLS Metathesaurus.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023Article
- Extending import detection algorithms for concept import from two to three biomedical terminologies.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Quality assurance and enrichment of biological and biomedical ontologies and terminologies.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- The UMLS knowledge sources at 30: indispensable to current research and applications in biomedical informatics.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe study sought to describe the literature related to the development of methods for auditing the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS), with particular attention to identifying errors and inconsistencies of attributes of the concepts in the UMLS Metathesaurus. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe applied the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) approach by searching the MEDLINE database and Google Scholar for studies referencing the UMLS and any of several terms related to auditing, error detection, and quality assurance. A qualitative analysis and summarization of articles that met inclusion criteria were performed.
resultsEighty-three studies were reviewed in detail. We first categorized techniques based on various aspects including concepts, concept names, and synonymy (n = 37), semantic type assignments (n = 36), hierarchical relationships (n = 24), lateral relationships (n = 12), ontology enrichment (n = 8), and ontology alignment (n = 18). We also categorized the methods according to their level of automation (ie, automated systematic, automated heuristic, or manual) and the type of knowledge used (ie, intrinsic or extrinsic knowledge).
conclusionsThis study is a comprehensive review of the published methods for auditing the various conceptual aspects of the UMLS. Categorizing the auditing techniques according to the various aspects will enable the curators of the UMLS as well as researchers comprehensive easy access to this wealth of knowledge (eg, for auditing lateral relationships in the UMLS). We also reviewed ontology enrichment and alignment techniques due to their critical use of and impact on the UMLS.
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.