ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Biomedical concept recognition with error-aware negative-enhanced ranking framework.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationMention-agnostic biomedical concept recognition (MA-BCR) requires inferring ontology concepts directly from passages, without relying on explicit mention spans. Prior work has mainly focused on generative and classification-based approaches. Ranking-based methods typically use a retrieve-rerank pipeline, and this paradigm has not been systematically studied for MA-BCR. Consequently, it remains unclear how ranking-based approaches compare with existing paradigms and what types of supervision are most beneficial for ranker training under limited annotation settings.
resultsThrough a systematic comparison of ranking-, generative-, and classification-based paradigms, we show that a two-stage retrieve-rerank architecture is the most robust and scalable backbone for MA-BCR. Building on this finding, we propose ENR, an error-aware negative-enhanced ranking framework that augments training with false positives collected from heterogeneous recognizers, improving reranking performance without increasing inference-time cost. Experiments on MM-HPO and MM-GO (two datasets derived from MedMentions-ST21pv) demonstrate that ENR substantially outperforms prior approaches. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The code and data underlying this article are available in Github at https://github.com/sl-633/enr-recognizer or in Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20730803.
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.