ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2023
Automated indexing using NLM's Medical Text Indexer (MTI) compared to human indexing in Medline: a pilot study.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated indexing in MEDLINE and the Medical Text Indexer (MTI), 2000-2025: a scoping review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2026Article
- Sometimes the apple does fall far from the tree: a case study on automatic indexing precision errors in PubMed.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2025Article
- Development and validation of LGBTQIA+ search filters: report on process and pilot filter for queer women.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2025Article
- Algorithmic indexing in MEDLINE frequently overlooks important concepts and may compromise literature search results.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2025Article
- Filtering failure: the impact of automated indexing in Medline on retrieval of human studies for knowledge synthesis.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2025Article
- Searching for the social determinants of health: observations from evidence synthesis publications.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Constructing a finer-grained representation of clinical trial results from ClinicalTrials.gov.Scientific data · 2024Article
- A Bibliographic Dataset of Health Artificial Intelligence Research.Health data science · 2024Article
- Automated indexing using NLM's Medical Text Indexer (MTI) compared to human indexing in Medline: a pilot study.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In 2002, the National Library of Medicine (NLM) introduced semi-automated indexing of Medline using the Medical Text Indexer (MTI). In 2021, NLM announced that it would fully automate its indexing in Medline with an improved MTI by mid-2022. This pilot study examines indexing using a sample of records in Medline from 2000, and how an early, public version of MTI's outputs compares to records created by human indexers. Methods: This pilot study examines twenty Medline records from 2000, a year before the MTI was introduced as a MeSH term recommender. We identified twenty higher- and lower-impact biomedical journals based on Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and examined the indexing of papers by feeding their PubMed records into the Interactive MTI tool. Results: In the sample, we found key differences between automated and human-indexed Medline records: MTI assigned more terms and used them more accurately for citations in the higher JIF group, and MTI tended to rank the Male check tag more highly than the Female check tag and to omit Aged check tags. Sometimes MTI chose more specific terms than human indexers but was inconsistent in applying specificity principles. Conclusion: NLM's transition to fully automated indexing of the biomedical literature could introduce or perpetuate inconsistencies and biases in Medline. Librarians and searchers should assess changes to index terms, and their impact on PubMed's mapping features for a range of topics. Future research should evaluate automated indexing as it pertains to finding clinical information effectively, and in performing systematic searches.
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.