↓ Skip to main content

Disease named entity recognition from biomedical literature using a novel convolutional neural network

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

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.
Title
Disease named entity recognition from biomedical literature using a novel convolutional neural network
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12920-017-0316-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhehuan Zhao, Zhihao Yang, Ling Luo, Lei Wang, Yin Zhang, Hongfei Lin, Jian Wang

Abstract

Automatic disease named entity recognition (DNER) is of utmost importance for development of more sophisticated BioNLP tools. However, most conventional CRF based DNER systems rely on well-designed features whose selection is labor intensive and time-consuming. Though most deep learning methods can solve NER problems with little feature engineering, they employ additional CRF layer to capture the correlation information between labels in neighborhoods which makes them much complicated. In this paper, we propose a novel multiple label convolutional neural network (MCNN) based disease NER approach. In this approach, instead of the CRF layer, a multiple label strategy (MLS) first introduced by us, is employed. First, the character-level embedding, word-level embedding and lexicon feature embedding are concatenated. Then several convolutional layers are stacked over the concatenated embedding. Finally, MLS strategy is applied to the output layer to capture the correlation information between neighboring labels. As shown by the experimental results, MCNN can achieve the state-of-the-art performance on both NCBI and CDR corpora. The proposed MCNN based disease NER method achieves the state-of-the-art performance with little feature engineering. And the experimental results show the MLS strategy's effectiveness of capturing the correlation information between labels in the neighborhood.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

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.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 16 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 27 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 33%
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 09 February 2019.
All research outputs
#20,372,319
of 25,040,629 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#978
of 1,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#343,655
of 453,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,040,629 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,378 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 453,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.