Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36139119›Full record

ReviewBiomolecules2022

Integrating Text Mining into the Curation of Disease Maps.

Malte Voskamp, Liza Vinhoven, Frauke Stanke, Sylvia Hafkemeyer, Manuel Manfred Nietert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomolecules, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Malte VoskampDepartment of Medical Bioinformatics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Goldschmidtstraße 1, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.
Liza VinhovenDepartment of Medical Bioinformatics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Goldschmidtstraße 1, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7119-9796
Frauke StankeClinic for Pediatric Pneumology, Allergology and Neonatology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6186-0149
Sylvia HafkemeyerMukoviszidose Institut gGmbH, In den Dauen 6, 53117 Bonn, Germany.
Manuel Manfred NietertDepartment of Medical Bioinformatics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Goldschmidtstraße 1, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5443-7943

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An adequate visualization form is required to gain an overview and ultimately understand the complex and diverse biological mechanisms of diseases. Recently, disease maps have been introduced for this purpose. A disease map is defined as a systems biological map or model that combines metabolic, signaling, and physiological pathways to create a comprehensive overview of known disease mechanisms. With the increase in publications describing biological interactions, efforts in creating and curating comprehensive disease maps is growing accordingly. Therefore, new computational approaches are needed to reduce the time that manual curation takes. Test mining algorithms can be used to analyse the natural language of scientific publications. These types of algorithms can take humanly readable text passages and convert them into a more ordered, machine-usable data structure. To support the creation of disease maps by text mining, we developed an interactive, user-friendly disease map viewer. The disease map viewer displays text mining results in a systems biology map, where the user can review them and either validate or reject identified interactions. Ultimately, the viewer brings together the time-saving advantages of text mining with the accuracy of manual data curation.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsData MiningPublicationsdisease mapssystems biologytext mining

Identifiers

PMID36139119
PMCPMC9496510

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.