Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41366304›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025

Subset selection based fusion for biomedical information retrieval tasks.

Jiahui Sun, Shengli Wu, Xiangjun Shen, Chris Nugent, Hu Lu

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. 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.

Jiahui SunSchool of Computer Science, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.
Shengli WuSchool of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, UK. s.wu1@ulster.ac.uk.
Xiangjun ShenSchool of Computer Science, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.
Chris NugentSchool of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, UK.
Hu LuSchool of Computer Science, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To improve the effectiveness and efficiency of biomedical information retrieval by proposing ranking-based methods for selecting an optimal subset of retrieval systems for data fusion, we propose three ranking-based subset selection methods SFS (Sequential Forward Search), D&P (Diversity & Performance), and P&D (Performance & Diversity). These methods were applied in combination with the Reciprocal Rank Fusion technique. Experiments were conducted on four medical datasets from TREC, using between 62 and 125 candidate retrieval systems, and selecting up to 15 for fusion. The proposed subset selection methods significantly improved retrieval performance. Fusing the selected systems using RRF yielded improvements ranging from 10% to over 60% compared to the best individual retrieval system across the datasets. They also outperform the state-of-the-art technology by a large margin. In summary, our subset selection approach offers a practical and cost-efficient solution for biomedical information retrieval, achieving substantial performance gains while reducing computational overhead.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyInformation Storage and RetrievalAlgorithmsDatabases, FactualHumansBiomedical information retrievalData fusionInformation retrievalRanking-based methodSubset selection

Identifiers

PMID41366304
PMCPMC12801601

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.