Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30473620›Full record

ArticleBiodiversity data journal2018

Incentivising use of structured language in biological descriptions: Author-driven phenotype data and ontology production.

Hong Cui, James A Macklin, Joel Sachs, Anton Reznicek, Julian Starr, Bruce Ford, Lyubomir Penev, Hsin-Liang Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biodiversity data journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

8 authors.

Hong CuiUniversity of Arizona, TUCSON, United States of America University of Arizona TUCSON United States of America.
James A MacklinAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Canada Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Ottawa Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9508-1349
Joel SachsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Canada Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Ottawa Canada.
Anton ReznicekUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States of America University of Michigan Ann Arbor United States of America.
Julian StarrUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada University of Ottawa Ottawa Canada.
Bruce FordUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada University of Manitoba Winnipeg Canada.
Lyubomir PenevPensoft Publishers & Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria Pensoft Publishers & Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Sofia Bulgaria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2186-5033
Hsin-Liang ChenUniversity of Massachusetts at Boston, Boston, United States of America University of Massachusetts at Boston Boston United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phenotypes are used for a multitude of purposes such as defining species, reconstructing phylogenies, diagnosing diseases or improving crop and animal productivity, but most of this phenotypic data is published in free-text narratives that are not computable. This means that the complex relationship between the genome, the environment and phenotypes is largely inaccessible to analysis and important questions related to the evolution of organisms, their diseases or their response to climate change cannot be fully addressed. It takes great effort to manually convert free-text narratives to a computable format before they can be used in large-scale analyses. We argue that this manual curation approach is not a sustainable solution to produce computable phenotypic data for three reasons: 1) it does not scale to all of biodiversity; 2) it does not stop the publication of free-text phenotypes that will continue to need manual curation in the future and, most importantly, 3) It does not solve the problem of inter-curator variation (curators interpret/convert a phenotype differently from each other). Our empirical studies have shown that inter-curator variation is as high as 40% even within a single project. With this level of variation, it is difficult to imagine that data integrated from multiple curation projects can be of high quality. The key causes of this variation have been identified as semantic vagueness in original phenotype descriptions and difficulties in using standardised vocabularies (ontologies). We argue that the authors describing phenotypes are the key to the solution. Given the right tools and appropriate attribution, the authors should be in charge of developing a project's semantics and ontology. This will speed up ontology development and improve the semantic clarity of phenotype descriptions from the moment of publication. A proof of concept project on this idea was funded by NSF ABI in July 2017. We seek readers input or critique of the proposed approaches to help achieve community-based computable phenotype data production in the near future. Results from this project will be accessible through https://biosemantics.github.io/author-driven-production.

Indexed as

Computable Phenotype DataControlled VocabularyData QualityPhenotype Ontologies

Identifiers

PMID30473620
PMCPMC6235995

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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 Socratic graph.