MEDLINE

MEDLINE
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:在关于“患者模拟”的文章中评估基于人类的医学主题词(MeSH)分配,这是一种模拟现实生活中患者情景并控制患者反应的技术。
    方法:创建了在医疗文本索引器-自动实施(2019年)之前索引的验证文章集,其中150种组合可能涉及“患者模拟”。文章分为四类模拟研究。七个MeSH术语的分配(模拟训练,患者模拟,高保真模拟训练,计算机模拟,患者特定模型,虚拟现实,和虚拟现实暴露疗法)进行了研究。准确性指标(灵敏度,精度,或阳性预测值)计算每个类别的研究。
    结果:从53种不同的单词组合中获得了一组7213篇文章,2634被排除为无关紧要。“模拟患者”和“标准化/标准化患者”是最常用的术语。4579条包括文章,发表在1044种不同的期刊上,被分类为:“机器/自动化”(8.6%),“教育”(75.9%)和“实践审计”(11.4%);4.1%为“不清楚”。文章的索引中位数为10MeSH(IQR8-13);然而,45.5%的人没有使用七个MeSH术语中的任何一个进行索引。患者模拟是最普遍的MeSH(24.0%)。自动化文章与计算机模拟MeSH更相关(灵敏度=54.5%;精度=25.1%),而教育文章与患者模拟MeSH相关(灵敏度=40.2%;精度=80.9%)。实践审核文章也被极化为患者模拟MeSH(灵敏度=34.6%;精度=10.5%)。
    结论:观察到与患者模拟相关的自由文本单词的使用不一致,以及基于人类的MeSH分配中的不准确性。这些限制可能会损害相关文献检索以支持证据综合练习。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate human-based Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) allocation in articles about \'patient simulation\'-a technique that mimics real-life patient scenarios with controlled patient responses.
    METHODS: A validation set of articles indexed before the Medical Text Indexer-Auto implementation (in 2019) was created with 150 combinations potentially referring to \'patient simulation\'. Articles were classified into four categories of simulation studies. Allocation of seven MeSH terms (Simulation Training, Patient Simulation, High Fidelity Simulation Training, Computer Simulation, Patient-Specific Modelling, Virtual Reality, and Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy) was investigated. Accuracy metrics (sensitivity, precision, or positive predictive value) were calculated for each category of studies.
    RESULTS: A set of 7213 articles was obtained from 53 different word combinations, with 2634 excluded as irrelevant. \'Simulated patient\' and \'standardized/standardized patient\' were the most used terms. The 4579 included articles, published in 1044 different journals, were classified into: \'Machine/Automation\' (8.6%), \'Education\' (75.9%) and \'Practice audit\' (11.4%); 4.1% were \'Unclear\'. Articles were indexed with a median of 10 MeSH (IQR 8-13); however, 45.5% were not indexed with any of the seven MeSH terms. Patient Simulation was the most prevalent MeSH (24.0%). Automation articles were more associated with Computer Simulation MeSH (sensitivity = 54.5%; precision = 25.1%), while Education articles were associated with Patient Simulation MeSH (sensitivity = 40.2%; precision = 80.9%). Practice audit articles were also polarized to Patient Simulation MeSH (sensitivity = 34.6%; precision = 10.5%).
    CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent use of free-text words related to patient simulation was observed, as well as inaccuracies in human-based MeSH assignments. These limitations can compromise relevant literature retrieval to support evidence synthesis exercises.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    库提供对数据库的访问,这些数据库具有嵌入到服务中的自动引用功能;但是,在人文和社会科学数据库中,这些自动引用按钮的准确性不是很高。
    这个案例比较了两个生物医学数据库,OvidMEDLINE和PubMed,看看两者是否足够可靠,可以自信地推荐给学生在写论文时使用。总共评估了60篇引文,每个引文生成器引用30次,基于2010年至2020年PubMed排名前30位的文章。
    OvidMEDLINE的错误率高于PubMed,但两个数据库平台均未提供无错误引用。自动引用工具不可靠。所检查的60篇引文中有0篇是100%正确的。图书馆员应继续建议学生不要仅依赖这些生物医学数据库中的引文生成器。
    UNASSIGNED: Libraries provide access to databases with auto-cite features embedded into the services; however, the accuracy of these auto-cite buttons is not very high in humanities and social sciences databases.
    UNASSIGNED: This case compares two biomedical databases, Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed, to see if either is reliable enough to confidently recommend to students for use when writing papers. A total of 60 citations were assessed, 30 citations from each citation generator, based on the top 30 articles in PubMed from 2010 to 2020.
    UNASSIGNED: Error rates were higher in Ovid MEDLINE than PubMed but neither database platform provided error-free references. The auto-cite tools were not reliable. Zero of the 60 citations examined were 100% correct. Librarians should continue to advise students not to rely solely upon citation generators in these biomedical databases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:作者姓名不完整,仅引用第一个可用的首字母而不是完整的名字,是MEDLINE中一个长期存在的问题,对生物医学文献系统产生负面影响。这项研究的目的是为MEDLINE创建增强作者姓名(EAN)数据集,以最大程度地增加完整作者姓名的数量。
    方法:EAN数据集是基于从多个文献数据库(如MEDLINE)收集的作者姓名进行大规模名称比较和恢复而构建的。Microsoft学术图,和语义学者。我们通过对EAN和MEDLINE的两个重要任务的作者姓名数据集(MAN)进行比较和统计分析来评估EAN对生物医学文献系统的影响。作者姓名搜索和作者姓名歧义消除。
    结果:评估结果表明,EAN将MEDLINE中的作者全名数量从6973万提高到了11090万。EAN不仅在2002年NLM更改其作者姓名索引策略之前恢复了大量的缩写名称,而且还提高了之后发表的文章中作者姓名的可用性。对作者姓名搜索和作者姓名歧义消除任务的评估表明,与MAN相比,EAN能够显着增强这两个任务。
    结论:EAN对全名的广泛覆盖表明,名称不完整的问题可以在很大程度上得到缓解。这对于开发改进的生物医学文献系统具有重要意义。EAN可在https://zenodo.org/record/10251358获得,更新版本可在https://zenodo.org/records/10663234获得。
    OBJECTIVE: Author name incompleteness, referring to only first initial available instead of full first name, is a long-standing problem in MEDLINE and has a negative impact on biomedical literature systems. The purpose of this study is to create an Enhanced Author Names (EAN) dataset for MEDLINE that maximizes the number of complete author names.
    METHODS: The EAN dataset is built based on a large-scale name comparison and restoration with author names collected from multiple literature databases such as MEDLINE, Microsoft Academic Graph, and Semantic Scholar. We assess the impact of EAN on biomedical literature systems by conducting comparative and statistical analyses between EAN and MEDLINE\'s author names dataset (MAN) on 2 important tasks, author name search and author name disambiguation.
    RESULTS: Evaluation results show that EAN improves the number of full author names in MEDLINE from 69.73 million to 110.9 million. EAN not only restores a substantial number of abbreviated names prior to the year 2002 when the NLM changed its author name indexing policy but also improves the availability of full author names in articles published afterward. The evaluation of the author name search and author name disambiguation tasks reveal that EAN is able to significantly enhance both tasks compared to MAN.
    CONCLUSIONS: The extensive coverage of full names in EAN suggests that the name incompleteness issue can be largely mitigated. This has significant implications for the development of an improved biomedical literature system. EAN is available at https://zenodo.org/record/10251358, and an updated version is available at https://zenodo.org/records/10663234.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:医学主题词(MeSH)词库是用于在MEDLINE中索引文章的受控词汇。MeSH主要是手动选择的,直到2022年6月,自动算法,完全实现了医学文本索引器(MTI)自动化。然后由人类索引器对自动索引文章的选择进行审查(策划),以确保过程的质量。
    目的:描述MEDLINE索引方法的关联(即,manual,自动化,与医学期刊相比,在药学实践期刊中进行MeSH作业,并进行了自动化策划)。
    方法:2016年至2023年之间在两组期刊上发表的原始研究文章(即,使用特定于期刊的搜索策略从PubMed中选择了五大普通医学和三种药学实践期刊)。文章的元数据,包括MeSH术语和索引方法,被提取。根据先前发表的研究,已编制了一系列特定于药学的MeSH术语,并调查了他们在药学实践期刊记录中的存在。使用双变量和多变量分析,以及影响大小的措施,期刊组之间比较了每篇文章的MeSH数量,期刊的地理起源,和索引方法。
    结果:共检索到8479篇原创研究文章:6254篇来自医学期刊,2225篇来自药学实践期刊。通过各种方法索引的文章数量不成比例;77.8%的医疗和50.5%的药房手动索引。在那些使用自动化系统索引的人中,然后整理了51.1%的医学和10.9%的药学实践文章,以确保索引质量。医学和药学期刊的三种索引方法中,每篇文章的MeSH数量各不相同,与15.5vs.手动索引中的13.0,9.4vs.7.4在自动索引中,和12.1vs.7.8在自动化,然后策划,分别。多变量分析表明,索引方法和期刊组对MeSH归属数量的影响显著,但不是杂志的地理起源。
    结论:使用自动MTI索引的文章比手动索引的文章具有更少的MeSH。与普通医学期刊文章相比,在药学实践期刊上发表的文章被索引的MeSH数量较少,无论使用何种索引方法。
    BACKGROUND: The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) thesaurus is the controlled vocabulary used to index articles in MEDLINE. MeSH were mainly manually selected until June 2022 when an automated algorithm, the Medical Text Indexer (MTI) automated was fully implemented. A selection of automated indexed articles is then reviewed (curated) by human indexers to ensure the quality of the process.
    OBJECTIVE: To describe the association of MEDLINE indexing methods (i.e., manual, automated, and automated + curated) on the MeSH assignment in pharmacy practice journals compared with medical journals.
    METHODS: Original research articles published between 2016 and 2023 in two groups of journals (i.e., the Big-five general medicine and three pharmacy practice journals) were selected from PubMed using journal-specific search strategies. Metadata of the articles, including MeSH terms and indexing method, was extracted. A list of pharmacy-specific MeSH terms had been compiled from previously published studies, and their presence in pharmacy practice journal records was investigated. Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, as well as effect size measures, the number of MeSH per article was compared between journal groups, geographic origin of the journal, and indexing method.
    RESULTS: A total of 8479 original research articles was retrieved: 6254 from the medical journals and 2225 from pharmacy practice journals. The number of articles indexed by the various methods was disproportionate; 77.8 % of medical and 50.5 % of pharmacy manually indexed. Among those indexed using the automated system, 51.1 % medical and 10.9 % pharmacy practice articles were then curated to ensure the indexing quality. Number of MeSH per article varied among the three indexing methods for medical and pharmacy journals, with 15.5 vs. 13.0 in manually indexed, 9.4 vs. 7.4 in automated indexed, and 12.1 vs. 7.8 in automated and then curated, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed significant effect of indexing method and journal group in the number of MeSH attributed, but not the geographical origin of the journal.
    CONCLUSIONS: Articles indexed using automated MTI have less MeSH than manually indexed articles. Articles published in pharmacy practice journals were indexed with fewer number of MeSH compared with general medical journal articles regardless of the indexing method used.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    手术部位感染(SSIs)构成了重大的临床挑战,对于接受外科手术的糖尿病患者来说,风险增加,后果严重。本系统综述旨在综合当前有关有效预防策略的证据,以减轻该弱势群体的SSI风险。从成立到2024年3月,我们全面搜索了多个电子数据库(PubMed,Medline,Embase,科克伦图书馆,CINAHL)以确定评估糖尿病手术患者SSI预防策略的相关研究。我们的搜索策略遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目。利用与糖尿病相关的关键词和医学主题词(MeSH)术语的组合,手术部位感染,预防策略,和外科手术。纳入标准侧重于同行评审的临床试验,随机对照试验,以及以英文发表的荟萃分析。搜索产生了三项符合资格标准的研究,进行数据提取和定性综合。关键发现强调了干预措施的有效性,例如优化围手术期血糖控制,及时预防性使用抗生素,术前细致的皮肤防腐可降低糖尿病手术患者的SSI率。基于个体患者因素的个性化预防方法的潜力,比如糖尿病类型和手术复杂性,被探索了。这一系统的审查强调了多方面的重要性,基于证据的方法预防糖尿病手术患者的SSI,整合策略,如血糖控制,抗生素预防,术前皮肤防腐.此外,我们的研究结果表明,针对患者个体特征量身定制的个性化护理路径的潜在益处.实施这些干预措施需要跨学科合作,适应不同的医疗保健环境,通过文化敏感的教育举措和患者参与。这一综合分析为临床实践提供了信息,促进患者安全,并有助于全球努力提高这一高危人群的手术效果。
    Surgical site infections (SSIs) pose a significant clinical challenge, with heightened risks and severe consequences for diabetic patients undergoing surgical procedures. This systematic review aims to synthesize the current evidence on effective prevention strategies for mitigating SSI risk in this vulnerable population. From inception to March 2024, we comprehensively searched multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL) to identify relevant studies evaluating SSI prevention strategies in diabetic surgical patients. Our search strategy followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, utilizing a combination of keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms related to diabetes, surgical site infections, prevention strategies, and surgical procedures. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, and meta-analyses published in English. The search yielded three studies meeting the eligibility criteria, subject to data extraction and qualitative synthesis. Key findings highlighted the efficacy of interventions such as optimized perioperative glycemic control, timely prophylactic antibiotic administration, and meticulous preoperative skin antisepsis in reducing SSI rates among diabetic surgical patients. The potential for personalized prevention approaches based on individual patient factors, such as diabetes type and surgical complexity, was explored. This systematic review underscores the importance of a multifaceted, evidence-based approach to SSI prevention in diabetic surgical patients, integrating strategies like glycemic control, antibiotic prophylaxis, and preoperative skin antisepsis. Furthermore, our findings suggest the potential benefits of personalized care pathways tailored to individual patient characteristics. Implementing these interventions requires interdisciplinary collaboration, adaptation to diverse healthcare settings, and patient engagement through culturally sensitive education initiatives. This comprehensive analysis informs clinical practice, fosters patient safety, and contributes to the global efforts to enhance surgical outcomes for this high-risk population.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:关系提取是生物医学文献挖掘领域的一项重要任务,为各种下游应用提供了显着的好处,包括数据库策展,药物再利用,和基于文献的发现。广泛覆盖的自然语言处理(NLP)工具SemRep为从生物医学文本中提取主语-谓语-宾语三元组建立了坚实的基线,并作为语义MEDLINE数据库(SemMedDB)的骨干。语义三元组的PubMed规模存储库。虽然SemRep达到了合理的精度(0.69),它的召回率相对较低(0.42)。在这项研究中,我们的目标是使用关系分类方法来增强SemRep,以最终增加SemMedDB的大小和效用。
    方法:我们组合并扩展了现有的SemRep评估数据集以生成训练数据。我们利用了预先训练的PubMedBERT模型,通过额外的对比预训练和微调来增强它。我们尝试了三个实体表示:提及,语义类型,和语义组。我们在SemRepGold标准数据集的一部分上评估了模型性能,并将其与SemRep性能进行了比较。我们还评估了模型对更大的12K随机选择的PubMed摘要的影响。
    结果:我们的结果表明,最佳模型的精度为0.62,召回率为0.81,F1评分为0.70。对12K摘要的评估表明,该模型可以将SemMedDB的大小增加一倍,当应用于整个PubMed时。我们还手动评估了SemRep先前未识别的模型预测的506个三元组的质量,发现这些三元组中有67%是正确的。
    结论:这些发现强调了我们的模型在实现生物医学文献中提到的关系的更全面覆盖方面的承诺。从而显示出其在增强生物医学文献挖掘的各种下游应用方面的潜力。与本研究相关的数据和代码可在https://github.com/Michelle-Mings/SemRep_Relationship上获得。
    OBJECTIVE: Relation extraction is an essential task in the field of biomedical literature mining and offers significant benefits for various downstream applications, including database curation, drug repurposing, and literature-based discovery. The broad-coverage natural language processing (NLP) tool SemRep has established a solid baseline for extracting subject-predicate-object triples from biomedical text and has served as the backbone of the Semantic MEDLINE Database (SemMedDB), a PubMed-scale repository of semantic triples. While SemRep achieves reasonable precision (0.69), its recall is relatively low (0.42). In this study, we aimed to enhance SemRep using a relation classification approach, in order to eventually increase the size and the utility of SemMedDB.
    METHODS: We combined and extended existing SemRep evaluation datasets to generate training data. We leveraged the pre-trained PubMedBERT model, enhancing it through additional contrastive pre-training and fine-tuning. We experimented with three entity representations: mentions, semantic types, and semantic groups. We evaluated the model performance on a portion of the SemRep Gold Standard dataset and compared it to SemRep performance. We also assessed the effect of the model on a larger set of 12K randomly selected PubMed abstracts.
    RESULTS: Our results show that the best model yields a precision of 0.62, recall of 0.81, and F1 score of 0.70. Assessment on 12K abstracts shows that the model could double the size of SemMedDB, when applied to entire PubMed. We also manually assessed the quality of 506 triples predicted by the model that SemRep had not previously identified, and found that 67% of these triples were correct.
    CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the promise of our model in achieving a more comprehensive coverage of relationships mentioned in biomedical literature, thereby showing its potential in enhancing various downstream applications of biomedical literature mining. Data and code related to this study are available at https://github.com/Michelle-Mings/SemRep_RelationClassification.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:基于传统文献的发现是基于通过公共中点将从单独出版物中提取的知识对连接起来,以得出以前看不见的知识对。为了避免经常与这种方法相关的过度生成,我们探索了一种基于单词进化的替代方法。单词进化检查单词的变化上下文,以识别其含义或关联的变化。我们研究了使用变化的单词上下文来检测适合重新利用的药物的可能性。
    结果:词嵌入,代表单词的上下文,是由MEDLINE中按时间顺序排列的出版物以每两个月为间隔构建的,为每个单词生成一个单词嵌入的时间序列。只专注于临床药物,在时间序列的最后时间段中再利用的任何药物都被注释为积极的例子。关于药物再利用的决定是基于统一医疗语言系统(UMLS),或使用MEDLINE中的SemRep提取的语义三元组。
    结论:注释数据允许深度学习分类,通过5倍交叉验证,要执行和多种架构要探索。使用UMLS标签的性能为65%,81%使用SemRep标签,表明该技术适用于检测用于再利用的候选药物。调查还表明,不同的体系结构与可用的训练数据量相关联,因此每种注释方法都应训练不同的模型。
    BACKGROUND: Traditional literature based discovery is based on connecting knowledge pairs extracted from separate publications via a common mid point to derive previously unseen knowledge pairs. To avoid the over generation often associated with this approach, we explore an alternative method based on word evolution. Word evolution examines the changing contexts of a word to identify changes in its meaning or associations. We investigate the possibility of using changing word contexts to detect drugs suitable for repurposing.
    RESULTS: Word embeddings, which represent a word\'s context, are constructed from chronologically ordered publications in MEDLINE at bi-monthly intervals, yielding a time series of word embeddings for each word. Focusing on clinical drugs only, any drugs repurposed in the final time segment of the time series are annotated as positive examples. The decision regarding the drug\'s repurposing is based either on the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS), or semantic triples extracted using SemRep from MEDLINE.
    CONCLUSIONS: The annotated data allows deep learning classification, with a 5-fold cross validation, to be performed and multiple architectures to be explored. Performance of 65% using UMLS labels, and 81% using SemRep labels is attained, indicating the technique\'s suitability for the detection of candidate drugs for repurposing. The investigation also shows that different architectures are linked to the quantities of training data available and therefore that different models should be trained for every annotation approach.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:低收入或中等收入国家(LMIC)人道主义环境中的姑息治疗是一个新领域,近年来经历了一定程度的增长势头。审查有助于这种不断增长的知识体系,除了确定未来研究的差距。总体目标是系统地探索LMIC人道主义环境中患者和/或其家人姑息治疗需求的证据。
    方法:Arksey和O'Malley's(IntJSocResMethodol。8:19-32,2005)范围审查框架构成了研究设计的基础,遵循Levac等人的进一步指导。(实施科学5:1-9,2010),乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(JBI)彼得斯等人。(JBI审阅者手册JBI:406-452,2020年),以及Tricco等人的系统评价和Meta分析扩展的首选报告项目(PRISMA-ScR)。(安实习生医学169:467-73,2018)。这包括了一个五步的方法和人口,概念,和上下文(PCC)框架。使用已经确定的关键词/术语,从2012年1月到2022年10月,将使用数据库搜索已发表的研究和灰色文献(可能包括护理和联合健康累积指数(CINAHL),MEDLINE,Embase,全球卫生,Scopus,应用社会科学索引和摘要(ASSIA),WebofScience,政策共用,JSTOR,国际货币基金组织和世界银行图书馆网,Google高级搜索,和GoogleScholar)以及选定的预打印站点和网站。数据选择将根据纳入和排除标准进行,每个阶段将由两名审查人员进行审查。用三分之一来解决任何分歧。提取的数据将在表中绘制。此审查不需要道德批准。
    结论:调查结果将以表格和图表/图表的形式呈现,然后是叙述性描述。审查将于2022年10月下旬至2023年初进行。这是第一个系统范围审查,专门探讨患者和/或其家人的姑息治疗需求,在LMIC人道主义环境中。审查结果的论文将于2023年提交出版。
    BACKGROUND: Palliative care in low- or middle-income country (LMIC) humanitarian settings is a new area, experiencing a degree of increased momentum over recent years. The review contributes to this growing body of knowledge, in addition to identifying gaps for future research. The overall aim is to systematically explore the evidence on palliative care needs of patients and/or their families in LMIC humanitarian settings.
    METHODS: Arksey and O\'Malley\'s (Int J Soc Res Methodol. 8:19-32, 2005) scoping review framework forms the basis of the study design, following further guidance from Levac et al. (Implement Sci 5:1-9, 2010), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Peters et al. (JBI Reviewer\'s Manual JBI: 406-452, 2020), and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) from Tricco et al. (Ann Intern Med 169:467-73, 2018). This incorporates a five-step approach and the population, concept, and context (PCC) framework. Using already identified key words/terms, searches for both published research and gray literature from January 2012 to October 2022 will be undertaken using databases (likely to include Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Scopus, Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), Web of Science, Policy Commons, JSTOR, Library Network International Monetary Fund and World Bank, Google Advanced Search, and Google Scholar) in addition to selected pre-print sites and websites. Data selection will be undertaken based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria and will be reviewed at each stage by two reviewers, with a third to resolve any differences. Extracted data will be charted in a table. Ethical approval is not required for this review.
    CONCLUSIONS: Findings will be presented in tables and diagrams/charts, followed by a narrative description. The review will run from late October 2022 to early 2023. This is the first systematic scoping review specifically exploring the palliative care needs of patients and/or their family, in LMIC humanitarian settings. The paper from the review findings will be submitted for publication in 2023.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:健康研究人员必须系统地了解影响暴露和结果的第三方变量,如有向无环图(DAG)所示。传统的通过文献综述和专家知识构建DAG往往需要更加系统和一致,导致潜在的偏见。我们尝试引入一种自动方法来构建网络链接感兴趣的变量。
    方法:利用医学文献中的大规模文本挖掘来构建基于语义MEDLINE数据库(SemMedDB)的概念网络。SemMedDB是“概念-关系-概念”三元组格式的PubMed规模存储库。概念之间的关系被归类为兴奋,抑制性,或将军。
    结果:为了便于在SemMedDB中使用大规模三元组,我们开发了一个可计算的生物医学知识(CBK)系统(https://cbk。bjmu.edu.cn/),一个网站,可以直接检索相关出版物及其相应的三元组,而无需编写SQL语句。阐述了三个案例研究来展示CBK系统的应用。
    结论:CBK系统是公开可用且用户友好的,可以快速捕获一组表型的影响因素,并在暴露-结果变量之间建立候选DAG。这可能是一个有价值的工具,可以减少考虑变量之间关系的探索时间,构建DAG。可靠和标准化的DAG可以显着改善观察性健康研究的设计和解释。
    OBJECTIVE: It is essential for health researchers to have a systematic understanding of third-party variables that influence both the exposure and outcome under investigation, as shown by a directed acyclic graph (DAG). The traditional construction of DAGs through literature review and expert knowledge often needs to be more systematic and consistent, leading to potential biases. We try to introduce an automatic approach to building network linking variables of interest.
    METHODS: Large-scale text mining from medical literature was utilized to construct a conceptual network based on the Semantic MEDLINE Database (SemMedDB). SemMedDB is a PubMed-scale repository of the \"concept-relation-concept\" triple format. Relations between concepts are categorized as Excitatory, Inhibitory, or General.
    RESULTS: To facilitate the use of large-scale triple sets in SemMedDB, we have developed a computable biomedical knowledge (CBK) system (https://cbk.bjmu.edu.cn/), a website that enables direct retrieval of related publications and their corresponding triples without the necessity of writing SQL statements. Three case studies were elaborated to demonstrate the applications of the CBK system.
    CONCLUSIONS: The CBK system is openly available and user-friendly for rapidly capturing a set of influencing factors for a phenotype and building candidate DAGs between exposure-outcome variables. It could be a valuable tool to reduce the exploration time in considering relationships between variables, and constructing a DAG. A reliable and standardized DAG could significantly improve the design and interpretation of observational health research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:深部脑刺激(DBS)可用于治疗多种神经和精神疾病,例如帕金森氏病,癫痫和强迫症;然而,为评估DBS访问和实施方面的差异,已经做了有限的工作。本范围审查的目的是确定DBS临床提供差异的来源。
    方法:将根据系统审查的首选报告项目和范围审查方法的荟萃分析扩展进行范围审查。相关研究将从包括MEDLINE/PubMed在内的数据库中确定,EMBASE和WebofScience,以及保留文章的参考列表。最初的搜索日期是2023年1月,研究仍在进行中。将完成对可能符合条件的研究的标题和摘要的初步筛选,收集相关研究以供全文回顾。然后,主要研究者和共同作者将独立审查所有符合纳入标准的全文文章。将以表格格式提取和收集数据。最后,结果将在表格和叙述报告中进行综合。
    背景:对于拟议的范围界定审查,不需要机构委员会审查或批准。研究结果将提交给相关的同行评审期刊和会议发表。
    该协议已在开放科学框架(https://osf.io/cxvhu)上进行了前瞻性注册。
    BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) can be used to treat several neurological and psychiatric conditions such as Parkinson\'s disease, epilepsy and obsessive-compulsive disorder; however, limited work has been done to assess the disparities in DBS access and implementation. The goal of this scoping review is to identify sources of disparity in the clinical provision of DBS.
    METHODS: A scoping review will be conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-extension for Scoping Reviews methodology. Relevant studies will be identified from databases including MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science, as well as reference lists from retained articles. Initial search dates were in January 2023, with the study still ongoing. An initial screening of the titles and abstracts of potentially eligible studies will be completed, with relevant studies collected for full-text review. The principal investigators and coauthors will then independently review all full-text articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted and collected in table format. Finally, results will be synthesised in a table and narrative report.
    BACKGROUND: No institutional board review or approval is necessary for the proposed scoping review. The findings will be submitted for publication to relevant peer-reviewed journals and conferences.
    UNASSIGNED: This protocol has been registered prospectively on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/cxvhu).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号