ReviewBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023
BELB: a biomedical entity linking benchmark.
Review in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Symptom Terminology Normalization in Traditional Chinese Medicine: Development and Evaluation of a 2-Stage Deep Learning Framework Based on Fine-Grained Semantic Classification.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- A practical and nuanced framework for entity linking evaluation.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2026Article
- Improving biomedical entity linking with generative relevance feedback.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- High-fidelity parameter-efficient fine-tuning for joint recognition and linking of diagnoses to ICD-10 in non-standard primary care notes.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Article
- HunFlair2 in a cross-corpus evaluation of biomedical named entity recognition and normalization tools.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- BELHD: improving biomedical entity linking with homonym disambiguation.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
motivationBiomedical entity linking (BEL) is the task of grounding entity mentions to a knowledge base (KB). It plays a vital role in information extraction pipelines for the life sciences literature. We review recent work in the field and find that, as the task is absent from existing benchmarks for biomedical text mining, different studies adopt different experimental setups making comparisons based on published numbers problematic. Furthermore, neural systems are tested primarily on instances linked to the broad coverage KB UMLS, leaving their performance to more specialized ones, e.g. genes or variants, understudied.
resultsWe therefore developed BELB, a biomedical entity linking benchmark, providing access in a unified format to 11 corpora linked to 7 KBs and spanning six entity types: gene, disease, chemical, species, cell line, and variant. BELB greatly reduces preprocessing overhead in testing BEL systems on multiple corpora offering a standardized testbed for reproducible experiments. Using BELB, we perform an extensive evaluation of six rule-based entity-specific systems and three recent neural approaches leveraging pre-trained language models. Our results reveal a mixed picture showing that neural approaches fail to perform consistently across entity types, highlighting the need of further studies towards entity-agnostic models. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The source code of BELB is available at: https://github.com/sg-wbi/belb. The code to reproduce our experiments can be found at: https://github.com/sg-wbi/belb-exp.
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.