Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40102814›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

A study on large-scale disease causality discovery from biomedical literature.

Shirui Yu, Peng Dong, Junlian Li, Xiaoli Tang, Xiaoying Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Shirui YuNational Science Library (Chengdu), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Peng DongInstitute of Medical Information, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Junlian LiInstitute of Medical Information, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xiaoli TangInstitute of Medical Information, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. tang.xiaoli@imicams.ac.cn.
Xiaoying LiInstitute of Medical Information, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. lixiaoying@imicams.ac.cn.

Funding

The Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Grant No:2021-I2M-1-033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomedical semantic relationship extraction could reveal important biomedical entities and the semantic relationships between them, providing a crucial foundation for the biomedical knowledge discovery, clinical decision making and other artificial intelligence applications. Identifying the causal relationships between diseases is a significant research field, since it expedites the identification of underlying disease pathogenesis mechanisms and promote better disease prevention and treatment. SemRep is an effective tool for semantic relationship extraction in the biomedical field, but it is not accurate enough for disease causality extraction, bringing challenges for downstream tasks. In this study, we proposed an optimization strategy for SemRep to enhance its accuracy in disease causality extraction.

methodsThis study aims to optimize disease causality extraction of SemRep tool by constructing a semantic predicate vocabulary that precisely expresses disease causality to support the automatic extraction of disease causality knowledge from biomedical literature. The proposed method invloves the following four steps: Firstly, we obtained a collection of semantic feature words expressing disease causality based on current causality predicate studies and the disease causality pairs extracted from SemMedDB. Then, we constructed a disease causality semantic predicate vocabulary by filtering and evaluating the clue words using quantitative comparisons. Following that, we extracted disease causality pairs from the biomedical literature using 36 semantic predicates with an accuracy greater than 80% for more meaningful knowledge discovery. Finally, we conducted knowledge discovery based on the extracted disease causality triples, which primarily includes unidirectional disease causality, bidirectional disease causality, as well as two specific types of disease causality: primary disease causality and rare disease causality.

resultsWe obtained a disease causality semantic predicate vocabulary containing 50 textual predicates with an accuracy of above 40%. 36 semantic predicates from the 60% accuracy group were used for disease causality extraction, yielding 259,434 disease causality pairs for subsequent knowledge discovery. Among them, 92,557 types with 176,010 unidirectional disease causality triples, and 6084 types with 83,424 bidirectional disease causality triples were found eventually. Two other types of disease causality, primary disease causality and rare disease causality, were also discovered.

conclusionsThe novelty of this research is that the proposed method enhanced the disease causality extraction of SemRep tool, resulting a more accurate and comprehensive disease causality extraction. It also facilitates an automatic disease causality extraction from large-scale biomedical literature. Additionally, a customized extraction of disease causality for its accuracy and comprehensiveness can be made possible by leveraging the quantified causality predicate vocabulary, allowing for flexible extraction of disease causality according to the actual circumstance.

Indexed as

CausalityData MiningKnowledge DiscoveryNatural Language ProcessingSemanticsHumansDisease causalityKnowledge discoverySemantic predicatesSemRep

Identifiers

PMID40102814
PMCPMC11916938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.