ArticleBioImpacts : BI2025
Hybrid deep learning models for text-based identification of gene-disease associations.
Article in BioImpacts : BI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Identifying gene-disease associations is crucial for advancing medical research and improving clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, the rapid expansion of biomedical literature poses significant obstacles to extracting meaningful relationships from extensive text collections. Methods: This study uses deep learning techniques to automate this process, using publicly available datasets (EU-ADR, GAD, and SNPPhenA) to classify these associations accurately. Each dataset underwent rigorous pre-processing, including entity identification and preparation, word embedding using pre-trained Word2Vec and fastText models, and position embedding to capture semantic and contextual relationships within the text. In this research, three deep learning-based hybrid models have been implemented and contrasted, including CNN-LSTM, CNN-GRU, and CNN-GRU-LSTM. Each model has been equipped with attentional mechanisms to enhance its performance. Results: Our findings reveal that the CNN-GRU model achieved the highest accuracy of 91.23% on the SNPPhenA dataset, while the CNN-GRU-LSTM model attained an accuracy of 90.14% on the EU-ADR dataset. Meanwhile, the CNN-LSTM model demonstrated superior performance on the GAD dataset, achieving an accuracy of 84.90%. Compared to previous state-of-the-art methods, such as BioBERT-based models, our hybrid approach demonstrates superior classification performance by effectively capturing local and sequential features without relying on heavy pre-training. Conclusion: The developed models and their evaluation data are available at https://github.com/NoorFadhil/Deep-GDAE.
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.