↓ Skip to main content

Automatic target validation based on neuroscientific literature mining for tractography

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
53 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.
Title
Automatic target validation based on neuroscientific literature mining for tractography
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2015.00066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xavier Vasques, Renaud Richardet, Sean L. Hill, David Slater, Jean-Cedric Chappelier, Etienne Pralong, Jocelyne Bloch, Bogdan Draganski, Laura Cif

Abstract

Target identification for tractography studies requires solid anatomical knowledge validated by an extensive literature review across species for each seed structure to be studied. Manual literature review to identify targets for a given seed region is tedious and potentially subjective. Therefore, complementary approaches would be useful. We propose to use text-mining models to automatically suggest potential targets from the neuroscientific literature, full-text articles and abstracts, so that they can be used for anatomical connection studies and more specifically for tractography. We applied text-mining models to three structures: two well-studied structures, since validated deep brain stimulation targets, the internal globus pallidus and the subthalamic nucleus and, the nucleus accumbens, an exploratory target for treating psychiatric disorders. We performed a systematic review of the literature to document the projections of the three selected structures and compared it with the targets proposed by text-mining models, both in rat and primate (including human). We ran probabilistic tractography on the nucleus accumbens and compared the output with the results of the text-mining models and literature review. Overall, text-mining the literature could find three times as many targets as two man-weeks of curation could. The overall efficiency of the text-mining against literature review in our study was 98% recall (at 36% precision), meaning that over all the targets for the three selected seeds, only one target has been missed by text-mining. We demonstrate that connectivity for a structure of interest can be extracted from a very large amount of publications and abstracts. We believe this tool will be useful in helping the neuroscience community to facilitate connectivity studies of particular brain regions. The text mining tools used for the study are part of the HBP Neuroinformatics Platform, publicly available at http://connectivity-brainer.rhcloud.com/.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 51 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 5 9%
Professor 4 8%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Computer Science 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 06 June 2021.
All research outputs
#6,234,930
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#393
of 1,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,803
of 266,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#15
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 266,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.