Dataset Information

AVADA: toward automated pathogenic variant evidence retrieval directly from the full-text literature.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:Both monogenic pathogenic variant cataloging and clinical patient diagnosis start with variant-level evidence retrieval followed by expert evidence integration in search of diagnostic variants and genes. Here, we try to accelerate pathogenic variant evidence retrieval by an automatic approach. METHODS:Automatic VAriant evidence DAtabase (AVADA) is a novel machine learning tool that uses natural language processing to automatically identify pathogenic genetic variant evidence in full-text primary literature about monogenic disease and convert it to genomic coordinates. RESULTS:AVADA automatically retrieved almost 60% of likely disease-causing variants deposited in the Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD), a 4.4-fold improvement over the current best open source automated variant extractor. AVADA contains over 60,000 likely disease-causing variants that are in HGMD but not in ClinVar. AVADA also highlights the challenges of automated variant mapping and pathogenicity curation. However, when combined with manual validation, on 245 diagnosed patients, AVADA provides valuable evidence for an additional 18 diagnostic variants, on top of ClinVar's 21, versus only 2 using the best current automated approach. CONCLUSION:AVADA advances automated retrieval of pathogenic monogenic variant evidence from full-text literature. Far from perfect, but much faster than PubMed/Google Scholar search, careful curation of AVADA-retrieved evidence can aid both database curation and patient diagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Birgmeier J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7301356 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

AVADA: toward automated pathogenic variant evidence retrieval directly from the full-text literature.

Birgmeier Johannes J Deisseroth Cole A CA Hayward Laura E LE Galhardo Luisa M T LMT Tierno Andrew P AP Jagadeesh Karthik A KA Stenson Peter D PD Cooper David N DN Bernstein Jonathan A JA Haeussler Maximilian M Bejerano Gill G

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 20190830 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>Both monogenic pathogenic variant cataloging and clinical patient diagnosis start with variant-level evidence retrieval followed by expert evidence integration in search of diagnostic variants and genes. Here, we try to accelerate pathogenic variant evidence retrieval by an automatic approach.<h4>Methods</h4>Automatic VAriant evidence DAtabase (AVADA) is a novel machine learning tool that uses natural language processing to automatically identify pathogenic genetic variant eviden ...[more]

PMID: 31467448

Similar Datasets

Project description:Computational methods have been used to find duplicate biomedical publications in MEDLINE. Full text articles are becoming increasingly available, yet the similarities among them have not been systematically studied. Here, we quantitatively investigated the full text similarity of biomedical publications in PubMed Central.72,011 full text articles from PubMed Central (PMC) were parsed to generate three different datasets: full texts, sections, and paragraphs. Text similarity comparisons were performed on these datasets using the text similarity algorithm eTBLAST. We measured the frequency of similar text pairs and compared it among different datasets. We found that high abstract similarity can be used to predict high full text similarity with a specificity of 20.1% (95% CI [17.3%, 23.1%]) and sensitivity of 99.999%. Abstract similarity and full text similarity have a moderate correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient: -0.423) when the similarity ratio is above 0.4. Among pairs of articles in PMC, method sections are found to be the most repetitive (frequency of similar pairs, methods: 0.029, introduction: 0.0076, results: 0.0043). In contrast, among a set of manually verified duplicate articles, results are the most repetitive sections (frequency of similar pairs, results: 0.94, methods: 0.89, introduction: 0.82). Repetition of introduction and methods sections is more likely to be committed by the same authors (odds of a highly similar pair having at least one shared author, introduction: 2.31, methods: 1.83, results: 1.03). There is also significantly more similarity in pairs of review articles than in pairs containing one review and one nonreview paper (frequency of similar pairs: 0.0167 and 0.0023, respectively).While quantifying abstract similarity is an effective approach for finding duplicate citations, a comprehensive full text analysis is necessary to uncover all potential duplicate citations in the scientific literature and is helpful when establishing ethical guidelines for scientific publications.

Project description:BackgroundThe Portable Document Format (PDF) is the most commonly used file format for online scientific publications. The absence of effective means to extract text from these PDF files in a layout-aware manner presents a significant challenge for developers of biomedical text mining or biocuration informatics systems that use published literature as an information source. In this paper we introduce the 'Layout-Aware PDF Text Extraction' (LA-PDFText) system to facilitate accurate extraction of text from PDF files of research articles for use in text mining applications.ResultsOur paper describes the construction and performance of an open source system that extracts text blocks from PDF-formatted full-text research articles and classifies them into logical units based on rules that characterize specific sections. The LA-PDFText system focuses only on the textual content of the research articles and is meant as a baseline for further experiments into more advanced extraction methods that handle multi-modal content, such as images and graphs. The system works in a three-stage process: (1) Detecting contiguous text blocks using spatial layout processing to locate and identify blocks of contiguous text, (2) Classifying text blocks into rhetorical categories using a rule-based method and (3) Stitching classified text blocks together in the correct order resulting in the extraction of text from section-wise grouped blocks. We show that our system can identify text blocks and classify them into rhetorical categories with Precision1 = 0.96% Recall = 0.89% and F1 = 0.91%. We also present an evaluation of the accuracy of the block detection algorithm used in step 2. Additionally, we have compared the accuracy of the text extracted by LA-PDFText to the text from the Open Access subset of PubMed Central. We then compared this accuracy with that of the text extracted by the PDF2Text system, 2commonly used to extract text from PDF. Finally, we discuss preliminary error analysis for our system and identify further areas of improvement.ConclusionsLA-PDFText is an open-source tool for accurately extracting text from full-text scientific articles. The release of the system is available at http://code.google.com/p/lapdftext/.

Dataset Information

AVADA: toward automated pathogenic variant evidence retrieval directly from the full-text literature.

Publications

AVADA: toward automated pathogenic variant evidence retrieval directly from the full-text literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets