ArticleScientific data2024
Dataset from a human-in-the-loop approach to identify functionally important protein residues from literature.
Article in Scientific data, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associating protein residues in the literature with structural data.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2026Article
- PDBe: enhanced structural data exploration to facilitate discovery.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Computational prediction of cellular elastic modulus from mechanosensitive gene expression at multiple biological levels.BioData mining · 2025Article
- Dataset from a human-in-the-loop approach to identify functionally important protein residues from literature.Scientific data · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We present a novel system that leverages curators in the loop to develop a dataset and model for detecting structure features and functional annotations at residue-level from standard publication text. Our approach involves the integration of data from multiple resources, including PDBe, EuropePMC, PubMedCentral, and PubMed, combined with annotation guidelines from UniProt, and LitSuggest and HuggingFace models as tools in the annotation process. A team of seven annotators manually curated ten articles for named entities, which we utilized to train a starting PubmedBert model from HuggingFace. Using a human-in-the-loop annotation system, we iteratively developed the best model with commendable performance metrics of 0.90 for precision, 0.92 for recall, and 0.91 for F1-measure. Our proposed system showcases a successful synergy of machine learning techniques and human expertise in curating a dataset for residue-level functional annotations and protein structure features. The results demonstrate the potential for broader applications in protein research, bridging the gap between advanced machine learning models and the indispensable insights of domain experts.
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.