Gaps within the Biomedical Literature: Initial Characterization and Assessment of Strategies for Discovery

Understanding the Usability of a Literature-Based Discovery System Among Clinical Researchers in Sarawak, Malaysia

The rapid increase in scientific publications makes it difficult for researchers to keep up with the latest literature and to explore new research directions. The literature-based discovery (LBD) systems aim to resolve this issue by bridging literatures from disparate fields to assist researchers in knowledge discovery and the formulation and testing of research hypotheses. Previous studies have focused mainly on evaluating the efficacy of LBD systems by replicating historical LBD events. The usability of LBD systems has been under-researched, which partly explains the low adoption of the systems. This paper presents a survey study that evaluates the usability of a LBD system for knowledge discovery and hypothesis refinement, and also investigates factors affecting its adoption among biomedical researchers in Sarawak, Malaysia. The findings suggest that the adoption of the LBD system is related to their perceived usefulness and perceived difficulty in interacting with the user interface features of the system.

Anne O'Tate: Value-added PubMed search engine for analysis and text mining

Over a decade ago, we introduced Anne O'Tate, a free, public web-based tool http://arrowsmith.psych.uic.edu/cgi-bin/arrowsmith_uic/AnneOTate.cgi to support user-driven summarization, drill-down and mining of search results from PubMed, the leading search engine for biomedical literature. A set of hotlinked buttons allows the user to sort and rank retrieved articles according to important words in titles and abstracts; topics; author names; affiliations; journal names; publication year; and clustered by topic. Any result can be further mined by choosing any other button, and small search results can be expanded to include related articles. It has been deployed continuously, serving a wide range of biomedical users and needs, and over time has also served as a platform to support the creation of new tools that address additional needs. Here we describe the current, greatly expanded implementation of Anne O'Tate, which has added additional buttons to provide new functionalities: We now allow users to sort and rank search results by important phrases contained in titles and abstracts; the number of authors listed on the article; and pairs of topics that co-occur significantly more than chance. We also display articles according to NLM-indexed publication types, as well as according to 50 different publication types and study designs as predicted by a novel machine learning-based model. Furthermore, users can import search results into two new tools: e) Mine the Gap!, which identifies pairs of topics that are under-represented within set of the search results, and f) Citation Cloud, which for any given article, allows users to visualize the set of articles that cite it; that are cited by it; that are co-cited with it; and that are bibliographically coupled to it. We invite the scientific community to explore how Anne O'Tate can assist in analyzing biomedical literature, in a variety of use cases.

Towards a characterization of apparent contradictions in the biomedical literature using context analysis

BACKGROUND

With the substantial growth in the biomedical research literature, a larger number of claims are published daily, some of which seemingly disagree with or contradict prior claims on the same topics. Resolving such contradictions is critical to advancing our understanding of human disease and developing effective treatments. Automated text analysis techniques can facilitate such analysis by extracting claims from the literature, flagging those that are potentially contradictory, and identifying any study characteristics that may explain such contradictions.

METHODS

Using SemMedDB, our own PubMed-scale repository of semantic predications (subject-relation-object triples), we identified apparent contradictions in the biomedical research literature and developed a categorization of contextual characteristics that explain such contradictions. Clinically relevant semantic predications relating to 20 diseases and involving opposing predicate pairs (e.g., an intervention treats or causes a disease) were retrieved from SemMedDB. After addressing inference, uncertainty, generic concepts, and NLP errors through automatic and manual filtering steps, a set of apparent contradictions were identified and characterized.

RESULTS

We retrieved 117,676 predication instances from 62,360 PubMed abstracts (Jan 1980-Dec 2016). From these instances, automatic filtering steps generated 2236 candidate contradictory pairs. Through manual analysis, we determined that 58 of these pairs (2.6%) were apparent contradictions. We identified five main categories of contextual characteristics that explain these contradictions: (a) internal to the patient, (b) external to the patient, (c) endogenous/exogenous, (d) known controversy, and (e) contradictions in literature. Categories (a) and (b) were subcategorized further (e.g., species, dosage) and accounted for the bulk of the contradictory information.

CONCLUSIONS

Semantic predications, by accounting for lexical variability, and SemMedDB, owing to its literature scale, can support identification and elucidation of potentially contradictory claims across the biomedical domain. Further filtering and classification steps are needed to distinguish among them the true contradictory claims. The ability to detect contradictions automatically can facilitate important biomedical knowledge management tasks, such as tracking and verifying scientific claims, summarizing research on a given topic, identifying knowledge gaps, and assessing evidence for systematic reviews, with potential benefits to the scientific community. Future work will focus on automating these steps for fully automatic recognition of contradictions from the biomedical research literature.

A survey on literature based discovery approaches in biomedical domain

Literature Based Discovery (LBD) refers to the problem of inferring new and interesting knowledge by logically connecting independent fragments of information units through explicit or implicit means. This area of research, which incorporates techniques from Natural Language Processing (NLP), Information Retrieval and Artificial Intelligence, has significant potential to reduce discovery time in biomedical research fields. Formally introduced in 1986, LBD has grown to be a significant and a core task for text mining practitioners in the biomedical domain. Together with its inter-disciplinary nature, this has led researchers across domains to contribute in advancing this field of study. This survey attempts to consolidate and present the evolution of techniques in this area. We cover a variety of techniques and provide a detailed description of the problem setting, the intuition, the advantages and limitations of various influential papers. We also list the current bottlenecks in this field and provide a general direction of research activities for the future. In an effort to be comprehensive and for ease of reference for off-the-shelf users, we also list many publicly available tools for LBD. We hope this survey will act as a guide to both academic and industry (bio)-informaticians, introduce the various methodologies currently employed and also the challenges yet to be tackled.

A systematic review on literature-based discovery workflow

As scientific publication rates increase, knowledge acquisition and the research development process have become more complex and time-consuming. Literature-Based Discovery (LBD), supporting automated knowledge discovery, helps facilitate this process by eliciting novel knowledge by analysing existing scientific literature. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the LBD workflow by answering nine research questions related to the major components of the LBD workflow (i.e., input, process, output, and evaluation). With regards to the input component, we discuss the data types and data sources used in the literature. The process component presents filtering techniques, ranking/thresholding techniques, domains, generalisability levels, and resources. Subsequently, the output component focuses on the visualisation techniques used in LBD discipline. As for the evaluation component, we outline the evaluation techniques, their generalisability, and the quantitative measures used to validate results. To conclude, we summarise the findings of the review for each component by highlighting the possible future research directions.

Rediscovering Don Swanson: the Past, Present and Future of Literature-Based Discovery

The late Don R. Swanson was well appreciated during his lifetime as Dean of the Graduate Library School at University of Chicago, as winner of the American Society for Information Science Award of Merit for 2000, and as author of many seminal articles. In this informal essay, I will give my personal perspective on Don's contributions to science, and outline some current and future directions in literature-based discovery that are rooted in concepts that he developed.