ArticleHeliyon2024
A framework for integrating biomedical knowledge in Wikidata with open biological and biomedical ontologies and MeSH keywords.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a comprehensive framework to enhance Wikidata as an open and collaborative knowledge graph by integrating Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords from PubMed publications. The primary data sources include OBO ontologies and MeSH keywords, which were collected and classified using SPARQL queries for RDF knowledge graphs. The semantic alignment between OBO ontologies and Wikidata was evaluated, revealing significant gaps and distorted representations that necessitate both automated and manual interventions for improvement. We employed pointwise mutual information to extract biomedical relations among the 5000 most common MeSH keywords in PubMed, achieving an accuracy of 89.40 % for superclass-based classification and 75.32 % for relation type-based classification. Additionally, Integrated Gradients were utilized to refine the classification by removing irrelevant MeSH qualifiers, enhancing overall efficiency. The framework also explored the use of MeSH keywords to identify PubMed reviews supporting unsupported Wikidata relations, finding that 45.8 % of these relations were not present in PubMed, indicating potential inconsistencies in Wikidata. The contributions of this study include improved methodologies for enriching Wikidata with biomedical information, validated semantic alignments, and efficient classification processes. This work enhances the interoperability and multilingual capabilities of biomedical ontologies and demonstrates the critical role of MeSH keywords in verifying semantic relations, thereby contributing to the robustness and accuracy of collaborative biomedical knowledge graphs.
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.