↓ Skip to main content

Semi Automated Transformation to OWL Formatted Files as an Approach to Data Integration

Overview of attention for article published in Methods of Information in Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Semi Automated Transformation to OWL Formatted Files as an Approach to Data Integration
Published in
Methods of Information in Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.3414/me13-02-0029
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Introduction: This article is part of the Focus Theme of Methods of Information in Medicine on "Managing Interoperability and Complexity in Health Systems". Background: Data heterogeneity is one of the critical problems in analysing, reusing, sharing or linking datasets. Metadata, whilst adding semantic description to data, adds an additional layer of complexity in the heterogeneity of metadata descriptors themselves. This can be managed by using a pre-defined model to extract the metadata, but this can reduce the richness of the data extracted. Objectives: to link the South London Stroke Register (SLSR), the London Air Pollution toolkit (LAP) and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) while transforming data into the Web Ontology Language (OWL) format. Methods: We used a four-step transformation approach to prepare meta-descriptions, convert data, generate and update meta-classes and generate OWL files. We validated the correctness of the transformed OWL files by issuing queries and assessing results against the original source data. Results: We have transformed SLSR LAP and CPRD into OWL format. The linked SLSR and CPRD OWL file contains 3644 male and 3551 female patients. The linked SLSR and LAP OWL file shows that there are 17 out of 35 outward postcode areas, where no overlapping data can support further analysis between SLSR and LAP. Conclusions: Our approach generated a resultant set of transformed OWL formatted files, which are in a query-able format to run individual queries, or can be easily converted into other more suitable formats for further analysis, and the transformation was faithful with no loss or anomalies. Our results have shown that the proposed method provides a promising general approach to address data heterogeneity.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 28%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Professor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Computer Science 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2014.
All research outputs
#20,231,392
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from Methods of Information in Medicine
#597
of 651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#376,683
of 439,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods of Information in Medicine
#392
of 426 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 651 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,572 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 426 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.