ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Improving biomedical entity linking with generative relevance feedback.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationBiomedical Entity Linking (BEL) maps mentions in biomedical text to standardized identifiers, enabling structured data integration and downstream knowledge discovery. However, current BEL systems remain fundamentally constrained by the recall of the initial candidate pool, where suboptimal retrieval limits the overall effectiveness of the normalization pipeline.
resultsWe present the first systematic evaluation of Generative Relevance Feedback (GRF) for enhancing candidate retrieval in state-of-the-art BEL systems. GRF leverages large language models (LLMs) to enrich the expressiveness of the mention in a zero-shot fashion. We assess GRF's impact under two scenarios-direct linking prediction and candidate generation in cascading normalization pipelines-and analyze its sensitivity to different LLMs, feedback types, and integration strategies. Experiments across eight corpora and four biomedical knowledge bases demonstrate that integrating GRF significantly improves both accuracy and recall, thereby increasing the upper bound on normalization performance. Our findings highlight GRF as an efficient, model-agnostic solution and underscore its potential as a key component for advancing BEL. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The code to reproduce our experiments can be found at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17853541.
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.