Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33816992›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2021

Application and evaluation of knowledge graph embeddings in biomedical data.

Mona Alshahrani, Maha A Thafar, Magbubah Essack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. KG-DFI: A Prediction of Drug-Food Interactions Based on Knowledge Graph Embedding.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Biomedical named entity recognition based on fusion multi-features embedding.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development of a Knowledge Graph Embeddings Model for Pain.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

Mona AlshahraniDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Jubail University College, Jubail, Saudi Arabia.
Maha A ThafarComputer, Electrical and Mathematical Sciences and Engineering Division (CEMSE), Computational Bioscience Research Center (CBRC), King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-0539-7361
Magbubah EssackComputer, Electrical and Mathematical Sciences and Engineering Division (CEMSE), Computational Bioscience Research Center (CBRC), King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-2709-5356

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Linked data and bio-ontologies enabling knowledge representation, standardization, and dissemination are an integral part of developing biological and biomedical databases. That is, linked data and bio-ontologies are employed in databases to maintain data integrity, data organization, and to empower search capabilities. However, linked data and bio-ontologies are more recently being used to represent information as multi-relational heterogeneous graphs, "knowledge graphs". The reason being, entities and relations in the knowledge graph can be represented as embedding vectors in semantic space, and these embedding vectors have been used to predict relationships between entities. Such knowledge graph embedding methods provide a practical approach to data analytics and increase chances of building machine learning models with high prediction accuracy that can enhance decision support systems. Here, we present a comparative assessment and a standard benchmark for knowledge graph-based representation learning methods focused on the link prediction task for biological relations. We systematically investigated and compared state-of-the-art embedding methods based on the design settings used for training and evaluation. We further tested various strategies aimed at controlling the amount of information related to each relation in the knowledge graph and its effects on the final performance. We also assessed the quality of the knowledge graph features through clustering and visualization and employed several evaluation metrics to examine their uses and differences. Based on this systematic comparison and assessments, we identify and discuss the limitations of knowledge graph-based representation learning methods and suggest some guidelines for the development of more improved methods.

Indexed as

BiomedicineBio-ontologiesComparative evaluationEmbeddings methodsKnowledge graphsLinked dataPerformance studies

Identifiers

PMID33816992
PMCPMC7959619

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.