Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40909156›Full record

ArticleArXiv2025

Improving Biomedical Knowledge Graph Quality: A Community Approach.

Katherina G Cortes, Shilpa Sundar, Sarah Gehrke, Keenan Manpearl, Junxia Lin, Daniel Robert Korn, Harry Caufield, Kevin Schaper, Justin Reese, Kushal Koirala and 6 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Katherina G CortesDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
Shilpa SundarCarolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Sarah GehrkeTISLab, Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Keenan ManpearlDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
Junxia LinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
Daniel Robert KornTISLab, Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Harry CaufieldEnvironmental Genomics and Systems Biology, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Kevin SchaperTISLab, Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Justin ReeseEnvironmental Genomics and Systems Biology, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Kushal KoiralaCurriculum in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Lawrence E HunterDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Chicago.
E Kathleen CarterRenaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Marcello DeLucaEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Arjun KrishnanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
Chris MungallEnvironmental Genomics and Systems Biology, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Melissa HaendelTISLab, Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Funding

The Monarch Initiative: Linking Diseases to Model Organism ResourcesR24OD011883 · OD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HAENDEL, MELISSA A, MUNGALL, CHRISTOPHER J · 2012 to 2024
$16.0M
Computational Bioscience Program Training GrantT15LM009451 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Katherina Kechris-Mays, Arjun Krishnan · 2007 to 2026
$11.7M
Improvements to the LinkML framework to support the Phenomics First open science resourceRM1HG010860 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HAENDEL, MELISSA A, MUNGALL, CHRISTOPHER J · 2020 to 2024
$10.3M
Resolving and understanding the genomic basis of heterogeneous complex traits and diseasesR35GM128765 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI KRISHNAN, ARJUN · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
NHGRI NIH HHS RM1 HG010860NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM128765NIH HHS R24 OD011883NLM NIH HHS T15 LM009451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomedical knowledge graphs (KGs) are widely used across research and translational settings, yet their design decisions and implementation are often opaque. Unlike ontologies that more frequently adhere to established creation principles, biomedical KGs lack consistent practices for construction, documentation, and dissemination. To address this gap, we introduce a set of evaluation criteria grounded in widely accepted data standards and principles from related fields. We apply these criteria to 16 biomedical KGs, revealing that even those that appear to align with best practices often obscure essential information required for external reuse. Moreover, biomedical KGs, despite pursuing similar goals and ingesting the same sources in some cases, display substantial variation in models, source integration, and terminology for node types. Reaping the potential benefits of knowledge graphs for biomedical research while reducing duplicated effort requires community-wide adoption of shared criteria and maturation of standards such as Biolink and KGX. Such improvements in transparency and standardization are essential for creating long-term reusability, improving comparability across resources, providing a rigorous foundation for artificial intelligence models, and enhancing the overall utility of KGs within biomedicine.

Identifiers

PMID40909156
PMCPMC12407614

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.