Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39319026›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics advances2024

Evaluating GPT and BERT models for protein-protein interaction identification in biomedical text.

Hasin Rehana, Nur Bengisu Çam, Mert Basmaci, Jie Zheng, Christianah Jemiyo, Yongqun He, Arzucan Özgür, Junguk Hur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Evidence-based AI: from trailblazer to trustblazer?Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026
    Article
  3. Longitudinal big biological data in the AI era.Molecular systems biology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Hasin RehanaDepartment of Computer Science, School of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2992-6547
Nur Bengisu ÇamDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bogazici University, Istanbul 34342, Turkey.
Mert BasmaciDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bogazici University, Istanbul 34342, Turkey.
Jie ZhengUnit for Laboratory Animal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States.
Christianah JemiyoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, United States.
Yongqun HeUnit for Laboratory Animal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9189-9661
Arzucan ÖzgürDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bogazici University, Istanbul 34342, Turkey.
Junguk HurDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0736-2149

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Detecting protein-protein interactions (PPIs) is crucial for understanding genetic mechanisms, disease pathogenesis, and drug design. As biomedical literature continues to grow rapidly, there is an increasing need for automated and accurate extraction of these interactions to facilitate scientific discovery. Pretrained language models, such as generative pretrained transformers and bidirectional encoder representations from transformers, have shown promising results in natural language processing tasks. Results: We evaluated the performance of PPI identification using multiple transformer-based models across three manually curated gold-standard corpora: Learning Language in Logic with 164 interactions in 77 sentences, Human Protein Reference Database with 163 interactions in 145 sentences, and Interaction Extraction Performance Assessment with 335 interactions in 486 sentences. Models based on bidirectional encoder representations achieved the best overall performance, with BioBERT achieving the highest recall of 91.95% and F1 score of 86.84% on the Learning Language in Logic dataset. Despite not being explicitly trained for biomedical texts, GPT-4 showed commendable performance, comparable to the bidirectional encoder models. Specifically, GPT-4 achieved the highest precision of 88.37%, a recall of 85.14%, and an F1 score of 86.49% on the same dataset. These results suggest that GPT-4 can effectively detect protein interactions from text, offering valuable applications in mining biomedical literature. Availability and implementation: The source code and datasets used in this study are available at https://github.com/hurlab/PPI-GPT-BERT.

Identifiers

PMID39319026
PMCPMC11419952

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.