Journal: Journal of biomedical semantics
BACKGROUND: With the development of high throughput methods of gene analyses, there is a growing need for mining tools to retrieve relevant articles in PubMed. As PubMed grows, literature searches become more complex and time-consuming. Automated search tools with good precision and recall are necessary. We developed GO2PUB to automatically enrich PubMed queries with gene names, symbols and synonyms annotated by a GO term of interest or one of its descendants. RESULTS: GO2PUB enriches PubMed queries based on selected GO terms and keywords. It processes the result and displays the PMID, title, authors, abstract and bibliographic references of the articles. Gene names, symbols and synonyms that have been generated as extra keywords from the GO terms are also highlighted. GO2PUB is based on a semantic expansion of PubMed queries using the semantic inheritance between terms through the GO graph. Two experts manually assessed the relevance of GO2PUB, GoPubMed and PubMed on three queries about lipid metabolism. Experts' agreement was high (kappa=0.88). GO2PUB returned 69 % of the relevant articles, GoPubMed: 40 % and PubMed: 29 %. GO2PUB and GoPubMed have 17 % of their results in common, corresponding to 24 % of the total number of relevant results. 70 % of the articles returned by more than one tool were relevant. 36 % of the relevant articles were returned only by GO2PUB, 17 % only by GoPubMed and 14 % only by PubMed. For determining whether these results can be generalized, we generated twenty queries based on random GO terms with a granularity similar to those of the first three queries and compared the proportions of GO2PUB and GoPubMed results. These were respectively of 77 % and 40 % for the first queries, and of 70 % and 38 % for the random queries. The two experts also assessed the relevance of seven of the twenty queries (the three related to lipid metabolism and four related to other domains). Expert agreement was high (0.93 and 0.8). GO2PUB and GoPubMed performances were similar to those of the first queries. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the use of genes annotated by either GO terms of interest or a descendant of these GO terms yields some relevant articles ignored by other tools. The comparison of GO2PUB, based on semantic expansion, with GoPubMed, based on text mining techniques, showed that both tools are complementary. The analysis of the randomly-generated queries suggests that the results obtained about lipid metabolism can be generalized to other biological processes. GO2PUB is available at http://go2pub.genouest.org.
BACKGROUND: BioHackathon 2010 was the third in a series of meetings hosted by the Database Center for Life Sciences (DBCLS) in Tokyo, Japan. The overall goal of the BioHackathon series is to improve the quality and accessibility of life science research data on the Web by bringing together representatives from public databases, analytical tool providers, and cyber-infrastructure researchers to jointly tackle important challenges in the area of in silico biological research. RESULTS: The theme of BioHackathon 2010 was the ‘Semantic Web’, and all attendees gathered with the shared goal of producing Semantic Web data from their respective resources, and/or consuming or interacting those data using their tools and interfaces. We discussed on topics including guidelines for designing semantic data and interoperability of resources. We consequently developed tools and clients for analysis and visualization. CONCLUSION: We provide a meeting report from BioHackathon 2010, in which we describe the discussions, decisions, and breakthroughs made as we moved towards compliance with Semantic Web technologies - from source provider, through middleware, to the end-consumer.
BACKGROUND: U-Compare is a text mining platform that allows the construction, evaluation and comparison of text miningworkflows. U-Compare contains a large library of components that are tuned to the biomedical domain. Userscan rapidly develop biomedical text mining workflows by mixing and matching U-Compare’s components.Workflows developed using U-Compare can be exported and sent to other users who, in turn, can import andre-use them. However, the resulting workflows are standalone applications, i.e., software tools that run and areaccessible only via a local machine, and that can only be run with the U-Compare platform. RESULTS: We address the above issues by extending U-Compare to convert standalone workflows into web servicesautomatically, via a two-click process. The resulting web services can be registered on a central server andmade publicly available. Alternatively, users can make web services available on their own servers, afterinstalling the web application framework, which is part of the extension to U-Compare. We have performed auser-oriented evaluation of the proposed extension, by asking users who have tested the enhanced functionalityof U-Compare to complete questionnaires that assess its functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency andmaintainability. The results obtained reveal that the new functionality is well received by users. CONCLUSIONS: The web services produced by U-Compare are built on top of open standards, i.e., REST and SOAP protocols,and therefore, they are decoupled from the underlying platform. Exported workflows can be integrated withany application that supports these open standards. We demonstrate how the newly extended U-Compareenhances the cross-platform interoperability of workflows, by seamlessly importing a number of text miningworkflow web services exported from U-Compare into Taverna, i.e., a generic scientific workflow constructionplatform.
BACKGROUND: The availability of annotated corpora has facilitated the application of machine learning algorithms to concept extraction from clinical notes. However, high expenditure and labor are required for creating the annotations. A potential alternative is to reuse existing corpora from other institutions by pooling with local corpora, for training machine taggers. In this paper we have investigated the latter approach by pooling corpora from 2010 i2b2/VA NLP challenge and Mayo Clinic Rochester, to evaluate taggers for recognition of medical problems. The corpora were annotated for medical problems, but with different guidelines. The taggers were constructed using an existing tagging system MedTagger that consisted of dictionary lookup, part of speech (POS) tagging and machine learning for named entity prediction and concept extraction. We hope that our current work will be a useful case study for facilitating reuse of annotated corpora across institutions. RESULTS: We found that pooling was effective when the size of the local corpus was small and after some of the guideline differences were reconciled. The benefits of pooling, however, diminished as more locally annotated documents were included in the training data. We examined the annotation guidelines to identify factors that determine the effect of pooling. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of pooling corpora, is dependent on several factors, which include compatibility of annotation guidelines, distribution of report types and size of local and foreign corpora. Simple methods to rectify some of the guideline differences can facilitate pooling. Our findings need to be confirmed with further studies on different corpora. To facilitate the pooling and reuse of annotated corpora, we suggest that – i) the NLP community should develop a standard annotation guideline that addresses the potential areas of guideline differences that are partly identified in this paper; ii) corpora should be annotated with a two-pass method that focuses first on concept recognition, followed by normalization to existing ontologies; and iii) metadata such as type of the report should be created during the annotation process.
Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) are being developed to meet specific application needs in diverse domains across the engineering and biomedical sciences (e.g. drug delivery). However, accompanying the exciting proliferation of novel nanomaterials is a challenging race to understand and predict their possibly detrimental effects on human health and the environment. The eNanoMapper project (www.enanomapper.net) is creating a pan-European computational infrastructure for toxicological data management for ENMs, based on semantic web standards and ontologies. Here, we describe the development of the eNanoMapper ontology based on adopting and extending existing ontologies of relevance for the nanosafety domain. The resulting eNanoMapper ontology is available at http://purl.enanomapper.net/onto/enanomapper.owl. We aim to make the re-use of external ontology content seamless and thus we have developed a library to automate the extraction of subsets of ontology content and the assembly of the subsets into an integrated whole. The library is available (open source) at http://github.com/enanomapper/slimmer/. Finally, we give a comprehensive survey of the domain content and identify gap areas. ENM safety is at the boundary between engineering and the life sciences, and at the boundary between molecular granularity and bulk granularity. This creates challenges for the definition of key entities in the domain, which we also discuss.
Provenance is a critical ingredient for establishing trust of published scientific content. This is true whether we are considering a data set, a computational workflow, a peer-reviewed publication or a simple scientific claim with supportive evidence. Existing vocabularies such as Dublin Core Terms (DC Terms) and the W3C Provenance Ontology (PROV-O) are domain-independent and general-purpose and they allow and encourage for extensions to cover more specific needs. In particular, to track authoring and versioning information of web resources, PROV-O provides a basic methodology but not any specific classes and properties for identifying or distinguishing between the various roles assumed by agents manipulating digital artifacts, such as author, contributor and curator.
Biological sciences are characterised not only by an increasing amount but also the extreme complexity of its data. This stresses the need for efficient ways of integrating these data in a coherent description of biological systems. In many cases, biological data needs organization before integration. This is not seldom a collaborative effort, and it is thus important that tools for data integration support a collaborative way of working. Wiki systems with support for structured semantic data authoring, such as Semantic MediaWiki, provide a powerful solution for collaborative editing of data combined with machine-readability, so that data can be handled in an automated fashion in any downstream analyses. Semantic MediaWiki lacks a built-in data import function though, which hinders efficient round-tripping of data between interoperable Semantic Web formats such as RDF and the internal wiki format.
The biodiversity domain, and in particular biological taxonomy, is moving in the direction of semantization of its research outputs. The present work introduces OpenBiodiv-O, the ontology that serves as the basis of the OpenBiodiv Knowledge Management System. Our intent is to provide an ontology that fills the gaps between ontologies for biodiversity resources, such as DarwinCore-based ontologies, and semantic publishing ontologies, such as the SPAR Ontologies. We bridge this gap by providing an ontology focusing on biological taxonomy.
Creation and use of ontologies has become a mainstream activity in many disciplines, in particular, the biomedical domain. Ontology developers often disseminate information about these ontologies in peer-reviewed ontology description reports. There appears to be, however, a high degree of variability in the content of these reports. Often, important details are omitted such that it is difficult to gain a sufficient understanding of the ontology, its content and method of creation.
Authoring bio-ontologies is a task that has traditionally been undertaken by skilled experts trained in understanding complex languages such as the Web Ontology Language (OWL), in tools designed for such experts. As requests for new terms are made, the need for expert ontologists represents a bottleneck in the development process. Furthermore, the ability to rigorously enforce ontology design patterns in large, collaboratively developed ontologies is difficult with existing ontology authoring software.