↓ Skip to main content

Approximate Subgraph Matching-Based Literature Mining for Biomedical Events and Relations

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Approximate Subgraph Matching-Based Literature Mining for Biomedical Events and Relations
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0060954
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haibin Liu, Lawrence Hunter, Vlado Kešelj, Karin Verspoor

Abstract

The biomedical text mining community has focused on developing techniques to automatically extract important relations between biological components and semantic events involving genes or proteins from literature. In this paper, we propose a novel approach for mining relations and events in the biomedical literature using approximate subgraph matching. Extraction of such knowledge is performed by searching for an approximate subgraph isomorphism between key contextual dependencies and input sentence graphs. Our approach significantly increases the chance of retrieving relations or events encoded within complex dependency contexts by introducing error tolerance into the graph matching process, while maintaining the extraction precision at a high level. When evaluated on practical tasks, it achieves a 51.12% F-score in extracting nine types of biological events on the GE task of the BioNLP-ST 2011 and an 84.22% F-score in detecting protein-residue associations. The performance is comparable to the reported systems across these tasks, and thus demonstrates the generalizability of our proposed approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 3%
Australia 2 3%
France 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Master 9 14%
Lecturer 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 32 51%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Mathematics 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 13 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 20 February 2024.
All research outputs
#2,079,307
of 23,767,404 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#26,267
of 202,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,546
of 199,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#629
of 5,134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,767,404 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 199,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.