ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
HunFlair2 in a cross-corpus evaluation of biomedical named entity recognition and normalization tools.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. 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.
- CellExLink: End-to-end cell-type recognition and normalization in biomedical text.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Accurate SPARQL generation via in-context learning and schema-based query construction.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- An Integrated Text Mining Approach for Discovering Pharmacological Effects, Drug Combinations, and Repurposing Opportunities of ACE Inhibitors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- An Evidence-Grounded Research Assistant for Functional Genomics and Drug Target Assessment.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Domain-specific embeddings uncover latent genetics knowledge.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- From knowledge silos to integrated insights: building a cardiovascular medication knowledge graph for enhanced medication knowledge retrieval, relationship discovery, and reasoning.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Effects of Molecular Crowding on the Structure, Folding, and Stability of DNA.Sub-cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- Multi-head CRF classifier for biomedical multi-class named entity recognition on Spanish clinical notes.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2024Article
- Towards discovery: an end-to-end system for uncovering novel biomedical relations.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationWith the exponential growth of the life sciences literature, biomedical text mining (BTM) has become an essential technology for accelerating the extraction of insights from publications. The identification of entities in texts, such as diseases or genes, and their normalization, i.e. grounding them in knowledge base, are crucial steps in any BTM pipeline to enable information aggregation from multiple documents. However, tools for these two steps are rarely applied in the same context in which they were developed. Instead, they are applied "in the wild," i.e. on application-dependent text collections from moderately to extremely different from those used for training, varying, e.g. in focus, genre or text type. This raises the question whether the reported performance, usually obtained by training and evaluating on different partitions of the same corpus, can be trusted for downstream applications.
resultsHere, we report on the results of a carefully designed cross-corpus benchmark for entity recognition and normalization, where tools were applied systematically to corpora not used during their training. Based on a survey of 28 published systems, we selected five, based on predefined criteria like feature richness and availability, for an in-depth analysis on three publicly available corpora covering four entity types. Our results present a mixed picture and show that cross-corpus performance is significantly lower than the in-corpus performance. HunFlair2, the redesigned and extended successor of the HunFlair tool, showed the best performance on average, being closely followed by PubTator Central. Our results indicate that users of BTM tools should expect a lower performance than the original published one when applying tools in "the wild" and show that further research is necessary for more robust BTM tools. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: All our models are integrated into the Natural Language Processing (NLP) framework flair: https://github.com/flairNLP/flair. Code to reproduce our results is available at: https://github.com/hu-ner/hunflair2-experiments.
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.