Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33006565›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020

Phenotypically Similar Rare Disease Identification from an Integrative Knowledge Graph for Data Harmonization: Preliminary Study.

Qian Zhu, Dac-Trung Nguyen, Gioconda Alyea, Karen Hanson, Eric Sid, Anne Pariser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Clustering rare diseases within an ontology-enriched knowledge graph.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  3. Clustering rare diseases within an ontology-enriched knowledge graph.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    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.

Qian ZhuDivision of Pre-Clinical Innovation, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Rockville, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4858-6333
Dac-Trung NguyenDivision of Pre-Clinical Innovation, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Rockville, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2591-9948
Gioconda AlyeaICF International Inc, Rockville, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9310-0163
Karen HansonICF International Inc, Rockville, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2253-1043
Eric SidOffice of Rare Diseases Research (ORDR), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7697-3026
Anne PariserOffice of Rare Diseases Research (ORDR), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9421-0126

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough many efforts have been made to develop comprehensive disease resources that capture rare disease information for the purpose of clinical decision making and education, there is no standardized protocol for defining and harmonizing rare diseases across multiple resources. This introduces data redundancy and inconsistency that may ultimately increase confusion and difficulty for the wide use of these resources. To overcome such encumbrances, we report our preliminary study to identify phenotypical similarity among genetic and rare diseases (GARD) that are presenting similar clinical manifestations, and support further data harmonization.

objectiveTo support rare disease data harmonization, we aim to systematically identify phenotypically similar GARD diseases from a disease-oriented integrative knowledge graph and determine their similarity types.

methodsWe identified phenotypically similar GARD diseases programmatically with 2 methods: (1) We measured disease similarity by comparing disease mappings between GARD and other rare disease resources, incorporating manual assessment; 2) we derived clinical manifestations presenting among sibling diseases from disease classifications and prioritized the identified similar diseases based on their phenotypes and genotypes.

resultsFor disease similarity comparison, approximately 87% (341/392) identified, phenotypically similar disease pairs were validated; 80% (271/392) of these disease pairs were accurately identified as phenotypically similar based on similarity score. The evaluation result shows a high precision (94%) and a satisfactory quality (86% F measure). By deriving phenotypical similarity from Monarch Disease Ontology (MONDO) and Orphanet disease classification trees, we identified a total of 360 disease pairs with at least 1 shared clinical phenotype and gene, which were applied for prioritizing clinical relevance. A total of 662 phenotypically similar disease pairs were identified and will be applied for GARD data harmonization.

conclusionsWe successfully identified phenotypically similar rare diseases among the GARD diseases via 2 approaches, disease mapping comparison and phenotypical similarity derivation from disease classification systems. The results will not only direct GARD data harmonization in expanding translational science research but will also accelerate data transparency and consistency across different disease resources and terminologies, helping to build a robust and up-to-date knowledge resource on rare diseases.

Indexed as

data harmonizationGARDphenotypical similarityrare diseases

Identifiers

PMID33006565
PMCPMC7568218

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.