ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2022
Translational drug-interaction corpus.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational approaches for drug-drug interaction prediction: a systematic review of data sources, modeling strategies, and evaluation frameworks.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- myAURA: a personalized health library for epilepsy management via knowledge graph sparsification and visualization.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Drug-drug interaction identification using large language models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Focused digital cohort selection from social media using the metric backbone of biomedical knowledge graphs.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2025Article
- Leveraging generative AI for clinical evidence synthesis needs to ensure trustworthiness.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2024Article
- Leveraging Generative AI for Clinical Evidence Synthesis Needs to Ensure Trustworthiness.ArXiv · 2024Article
- Multiple sampling schemes and deep learning improve active learning performance in drug-drug interaction information retrieval analysis from the literature.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The discovery of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) that have a translational impact among in vitro pharmacokinetics (PK), in vivo PK and clinical outcomes depends largely on the quality of the annotated corpus available for text mining. We have developed a new DDI corpus based on an annotation scheme that builds upon and extends previous ones, where an abstract is fragmented and each fragment is then annotated along eight dimensions, namely, focus, polarity, certainty, evidence, directionality, study type, interaction type and mechanism. The guideline for defining these dimensions has undergone refinement during the annotation process. Our DDI corpus comprises 900 positive DDI abstracts and 750 that are not directly relevant to DDI. The abstracts in corpus are separated into eight categories of DDI or non-DDI evidence: DDI with pharmacokinetic (PK) mechanism, in vivo DDI PK, DDI clinical, drug-nutrition interaction, single drug, not drug related, in vitro pharmacodynamic (PD) and case report. Seven annotators, three annotators with drug-interaction research experience and four annotators with less drug-interaction research experience independently annotated the DDI corpus, where two researchers independently annotated each abstract. After two rounds of annotations with additional training in between, agreement improved from (0.79, 0.96, 0.86, 0.70, 0.91, 0.65, 0.78, 0.90) to (0.93, 0.99, 0.96, 0.94, 0.95, 0.93, 0.96, 0.97) for focus, certainty, evidence, study type, interaction type, mechanisms, polarity and direction, respectively. The novice-level annotators improved from 0.83 to 0.96, while the expert-level annotators stayed in high performance with some improvement, from 0.90 to 0.96. In summary, we achieved 96% agreement among each pair of annotators with regard to the eight dimensions. The annotated corpus is now available to the community for inclusion in their text-mining pipelines. Database URL https://github.com/zha204/DDI-Corpus-Database/tree/master/DDI%20corpus.
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.