↓ Skip to main content

miRiaD: A Text Mining Tool for Detecting Associations of microRNAs with Diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Semantics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
miRiaD: A Text Mining Tool for Detecting Associations of microRNAs with Diseases
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13326-015-0044-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samir Gupta, Karen E. Ross, Catalina O. Tudor, Cathy H. Wu, Carl J. Schmidt, K. Vijay-Shanker

Abstract

MicroRNAs are increasingly being appreciated as critical players in human diseases, and questions concerning the role of microRNAs arise in many areas of biomedical research. There are several manually curated databases of microRNA-disease associations gathered from the biomedical literature; however, it is difficult for curators of these databases to keep up with the explosion of publications in the microRNA-disease field. Moreover, automated literature mining tools that assist manual curation of microRNA-disease associations currently capture only one microRNA property (expression) in the context of one disease (cancer). Thus, there is a clear need to develop more sophisticated automated literature mining tools that capture a variety of microRNA properties and relations in the context of multiple diseases to provide researchers with fast access to the most recent published information and to streamline and accelerate manual curation. We have developed miRiaD (microRNAs in association with Disease), a text-mining tool that automatically extracts associations between microRNAs and diseases from the literature. These associations are often not directly linked, and the intermediate relations are often highly informative for the biomedical researcher. Thus, miRiaD extracts the miR-disease pairs together with an explanation for their association. We also developed a procedure that assigns scores to sentences, marking their informativeness, based on the microRNA-disease relation observed within the sentence. miRiaD was applied to the entire Medline corpus, identifying 8301 PMIDs with miR-disease associations. These abstracts and the miR-disease associations are available for browsing at http://biotm.cis.udel.edu/miRiaD . We evaluated the recall and precision of miRiaD with respect to information of high interest to public microRNA-disease database curators (expression and target gene associations), obtaining a recall of 88.46-90.78. When we expanded the evaluation to include sentences with a wide range of microRNA-disease information that may be of interest to biomedical researchers, miRiaD also performed very well with a F-score of 89.4. The informativeness ranking of sentences was evaluated in terms of nDCG (0.977) and correlation metrics (0.678-0.727) when compared to an annotator's ranked list. miRiaD, a high performance system that can capture a wide variety of microRNA-disease related information, extends beyond the scope of existing microRNA-disease resources. It can be incorporated into manual curation pipelines and serve as a resource for biomedical researchers interested in the role of microRNAs in disease. In our ongoing work we are developing an improved miRiaD web interface that will facilitate complex queries about microRNA-disease relationships, such as "In what diseases does microRNA regulation of apoptosis play a role?" or "Is there overlap in the sets of genes targeted by microRNAs in different types of dementia?"."

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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 17%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 12 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 18 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,480,713
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#145
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,261
of 299,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#9
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 299,065 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.