Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41057775›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025

Knowledge-augmented pre-trained language models for biomedical relation extraction.

Mario Sänger, Ulf Leser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Large Language Models in Bio-Ontology Research: A Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
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

2 authors.

Mario SängerDepartment of Computer Science, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany.
Ulf LeserDepartment of Computer Science, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany. leser@informatik.hu-berlin.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automatic relationship extraction (RE) from biomedical literature is critical for managing the vast amount of scientific knowledge produced each year. In recent years, utilizing pre-trained language models (PLMs) has become the prevalent approach in RE. Several studies report improved performance when incorporating additional context information while fine-tuning PLMs for RE. However, variations in the PLMs applied, the databases used for augmentation, hyper-parameter optimization, and evaluation methods complicate direct comparisons between studies and raise questions about the generalizability of these findings. Our study addresses this research gap by evaluating PLMs enhanced with contextual information on five datasets spanning four relation scenarios within a consistent evaluation framework. We evaluate three baseline PLMs and first conduct extensive hyperparameter optimization. After selecting the top-performing model, we enhance it with additional data, including textual entity descriptions, relational information from knowledge graphs, and molecular structure encodings. Our findings illustrate the importance of (1) the choice of the underlying language model and (2) a comprehensive hyperparameter optimization for achieving strong extraction performance. Although inclusion of context information yield only minor overall improvements, an ablation study reveals substantial benefits for smaller PLMs when such external data was included during fine-tuning.

Indexed as

Data MiningNatural Language ProcessingDatabases, FactualLarge Language ModelsBenchmarkBiomedical natural language processingKnowledge augmentationPre-trained language modelsrelation extraction

Identifiers

PMID41057775
PMCPMC12502496

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.