↓ Skip to main content

SemaTyP: a knowledge graph based literature mining method for drug discovery

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
SemaTyP: a knowledge graph based literature mining method for drug discovery
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12859-018-2167-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shengtian Sang, Zhihao Yang, Lei Wang, Xiaoxia Liu, Hongfei Lin, Jian Wang

Abstract

Drug discovery is the process through which potential new medicines are identified. High-throughput screening and computer-aided drug discovery/design are the two main drug discovery methods for now, which have successfully discovered a series of drugs. However, development of new drugs is still an extremely time-consuming and expensive process. Biomedical literature contains important clues for the identification of potential treatments. It could support experts in biomedicine on their way towards new discoveries. Here, we propose a biomedical knowledge graph-based drug discovery method called SemaTyP, which discovers candidate drugs for diseases by mining published biomedical literature. We first construct a biomedical knowledge graph with the relations extracted from biomedical abstracts, then a logistic regression model is trained by learning the semantic types of paths of known drug therapies' existing in the biomedical knowledge graph, finally the learned model is used to discover drug therapies for new diseases. The experimental results show that our method could not only effectively discover new drug therapies for new diseases, but also could provide the potential mechanism of action of the candidate drugs. In this paper we propose a novel knowledge graph based literature mining method for drug discovery. It could be a supplementary method for current drug discovery methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 19%
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 46 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 40 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Unspecified 6 4%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 49 35%
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 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,974,941
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#5,977
of 7,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,421
of 331,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#75
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 331,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.