ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science
Extracting Concepts for Precision Oncology from the Biomedical Literature.
Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Proliferation and Apoptosis Pathways and Factors in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper describes an initial dataset and automatic natural language processing (NLP) method for extracting concepts related to precision oncology from biomedical research articles. We extract five concept types: Cancer, Mutation, Population, Treatment, Outcome. A corpus of 250 biomedical abstracts were annotated with these concepts following standard double-annotation procedures. We then experiment with BERT-based models for concept extraction. The best-performing model achieved a precision of 63.8%, a recall of 71.9%, and an F1 of 67.1. Finally, we propose additional directions for research for improving extraction performance and utilizing the NLP system in downstream precision oncology applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34457142PMC8378653What 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.