ArticlePloS one2022
A reproducible experimental survey on biomedical sentence similarity: A string-based method sets the state of the art.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This registered report introduces the largest, and for the first time, reproducible experimental survey on biomedical sentence similarity with the following aims: (1) to elucidate the state of the art of the problem; (2) to solve some reproducibility problems preventing the evaluation of most current methods; (3) to evaluate several unexplored sentence similarity methods; (4) to evaluate for the first time an unexplored benchmark, called Corpus-Transcriptional-Regulation (CTR); (5) to carry out a study on the impact of the pre-processing stages and Named Entity Recognition (NER) tools on the performance of the sentence similarity methods; and finally, (6) to bridge the lack of software and data reproducibility resources for methods and experiments in this line of research. Our reproducible experimental survey is based on a single software platform, which is provided with a detailed reproducibility protocol and dataset as supplementary material to allow the exact replication of all our experiments and results. In addition, we introduce a new aggregated string-based sentence similarity method, called LiBlock, together with eight variants of current ontology-based methods, and a new pre-trained word embedding model trained on the full-text articles in the PMC-BioC corpus. Our experiments show that our novel string-based measure establishes the new state of the art in sentence similarity analysis in the biomedical domain and significantly outperforms all the methods evaluated herein, with the only exception of one ontology-based method. Likewise, our experiments confirm that the pre-processing stages, and the choice of the NER tool for ontology-based methods, have a very significant impact on the performance of the sentence similarity methods. We also detail some drawbacks and limitations of current methods, and highlight the need to refine the current benchmarks. Finally, a notable finding is that our new string-based method significantly outperforms all state-of-the-art Machine Learning (ML) models evaluated herein.
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.