Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41234473›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2025

Sometimes the apple does fall far from the tree: a case study on automatic indexing precision errors in PubMed.

Paije Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Goals and strategies for the indexing of publication types and study designs.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026
    Article
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

1 author.

Paije Wilsonpaije.wilson@wisc.edu, Health Sciences Librarian, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0799-4776

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This case study identifies the presence and prevalence of precision indexing errors in a subset of automatically indexed MEDLINE records in PubMed (specifically, all MEDLINE records automatically indexed with the MeSH term Malus, the genus name for apple trees). In short, how well does automatic indexing compare [figurative] apples to [literal] apples? Methods: 1,705 MEDLINE records automatically indexed with the MeSH term Results: 135 (7.9%) records were incorrectly indexed with the MeSH term Conclusion: As indicated by this study's findings, automatic indexing can commit errors when indexing records that have words with non-literal or alternative meanings in their titles or abstracts. Librarians should be mindful of the existence of automatic indexing errors, and instruct authors on how best to ameliorate the effects of them within their own manuscripts.

Indexed as

Abstracting and IndexingInformation Storage and RetrievalPubMedHumansMedical Subject HeadingsNatural Language ProcessingAbstract and Indexingautomatic indexingMedical subject headingMEDLINEPubMed

Identifiers

PMID41234473
PMCPMC12606386

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.