Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742785›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2021

Application of MCAT questions as a testing tool and evaluation metric for knowledge graph-based reasoning systems.

Karamarie Fecho, James Balhoff, Chris Bizon, William E Byrd, Sui Hang, David Koslicki, Stefano E Rensi, Patrick L Schmitt, Mathias J Wawer, Mark Williams and 1 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors.

Karamarie FechoRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
James BalhoffRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Chris BizonRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
William E ByrdUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Sui HangInstitute for Systems Biology, Seattle, Washington, USA.
David KoslickiPenn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Stefano E RensiStanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Patrick L SchmittRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Mathias J WawerBroad Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Mark WilliamsNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Stanley C AhaltRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

NCATS Biomedical Data Translator ProgramZIATR000276 · NCATS · NATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCING TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES · PI MATHÉ, EWY · 2017 to 2025
$6.3M
Biomedical Data Translator Development of Autonomous Relay Agent: ARAXOT2TR003428 · NCATS · OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI DEUTSCH, ERIC, KOSLICKI, DAVID · 2020 to 2024
$5.6M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment and Architecture DesignOT3TR002026 · NCATS · INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY · PI GLUSMAN, GWÊNLYN, HUANG, SUI · 2016 to 2019
$3.3M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment of Reasoning Tool: University of North Carolina at Chapel HillOT2TR002514 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI TROPSHA, ALEXANDER · 2018 to 2019
$2.0M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment of Reasoning Tool: Broad InstituteOT2TR002584 · NCATS · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI CLEMONS, PAUL ANDREW · 2018 to 2019
$1.6M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment of Reasoning Tool: Oregon State UniversityOT2TR002520 · NCATS · OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI DEUTSCH, ERIC, RAMSEY, STEPHEN A. · 2018 to 2019
$1.4M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment of Reasoning Tool: University of Alabama at BirminghamOT2TR002517 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI MIGHT, MATTHEW BRENDON · 2018 to 2019
$1.1M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment and Architecture DesignOT3TR002025 · NCATS · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI CLEMONS, PAUL ANDREW · 2016 to 2017
$1.1M
Biomedical Data Translator Technical Feasibility Assessment of Reasoning Tool: Stanford UniversityOT2TR002515 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO · 2018 to 2019
$845k
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR002514NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR002515NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR002517NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR002520NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR002584NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR003428NCATS NIH HHS OT3 TR002025NCATS NIH HHS OT3 TR002026NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"Knowledge graphs" (KGs) have become a common approach for representing biomedical knowledge. In a KG, multiple biomedical data sets can be linked together as a graph representation, with nodes representing entities, such as "chemical substance" or "genes," and edges representing predicates, such as "causes" or "treats." Reasoning and inference algorithms can then be applied to the KG and used to generate new knowledge. We developed three KG-based question-answering systems as part of the Biomedical Data Translator program. These systems are typically tested and evaluated using traditional software engineering tools and approaches. In this study, we explored a team-based approach to test and evaluate the prototype "Translator Reasoners" through the application of Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) questions. Specifically, we describe three "hackathons," in which the developers of each of the three systems worked together with a moderator to determine whether the applications could be used to solve MCAT questions. The results demonstrate progressive improvement in system performance, with 0% (0/5) correct answers during the first hackathon, 75% (3/4) correct during the second hackathon, and 100% (5/5) correct during the final hackathon. We discuss the technical and sociologic lessons learned and conclude that MCAT questions can be applied successfully in the context of moderated hackathons to test and evaluate prototype KG-based question-answering systems, identify gaps in current capabilities, and improve performance. Finally, we highlight several published clinical and translational science applications of the Translator Reasoners.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCollege Admission TestDatasets as TopicHumansPattern Recognition, AutomatedTranslational Science, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID33742785
PMCPMC8504839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.