A corpus of potentially contradictory research claims from cardiovascular research abstracts.
A corpus of potentially contradictory research claims from cardiovascular research abstracts.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13326-016-0083-z
复制
发表时间：
2016-06-07
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Stevenson M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alamri A;Stevenson M
生物医学和相关领域的研究文献包含大量的声明，例如治疗的有效性。这些说法并不总是一致的，甚至可能相互矛盾。对于那些依赖生物医学文献的人来说，能够识别相互矛盾的说法是很重要的。需要自动化的方法来识别和解决它们，以科普可用的信息量。然而，由于缺乏适当的资源，这一领域的研究受到了阻碍。我们描述了一种方法来开发一个语料库，通过提供可能相互矛盾的索赔的例子来解决这一差距，并展示了如何应用它来识别这些索赔从Medline摘要相关的心血管疾病的主题。从Medline中确定了一组与心血管疾病四个主题相关的系统综述，并进行分析，以确定他们所综述的摘要是否包含相互矛盾的研究声明。对于每一篇综述，注释者被要求分析这些摘要，以确定其中回答综述中解决的问题的声明。注释者还被要求指出主张与该问题的关系以及主张的类型。共有259篇摘要与24篇系统性综述被用于形成语料库。注释者之间的一致性很高，这表明他们提供的信息是可靠的。本文介绍了一种方法，用于构建一个语料库包含矛盾的研究索赔的生物医学文献。该语料库可供进一步研究这一领域，并支持开发自动化的方法来识别矛盾。
Research literature in biomedicine and related fields contains a huge number of claims, such as the effectiveness of treatments. These claims are not always consistent and may even contradict each other. Being able to identify contradictory claims is important for those who rely on the biomedical literature. Automated methods to identify and resolve them are required to cope with the amount of information available. However, research in this area has been hampered by a lack of suitable resources. We describe a methodology to develop a corpus which addresses this gap by providing examples of potentially contradictory claims and demonstrate how it can be applied to identify these claims from Medline abstracts related to the topic of cardiovascular disease. A set of systematic reviews concerned with four topics in cardiovascular disease were identified from Medline and analysed to determine whether the abstracts they reviewed contained contradictory research claims. For each review, annotators were asked to analyse these abstracts to identify claims within them that answered the question addressed in the review. The annotators were also asked to indicate how the claim related to that question and the type of the claim. A total of 259 abstracts associated with 24 systematic reviews were used to form the corpus. Agreement between the annotators was high, suggesting that the information they provided is reliable. The paper describes a methodology for constructing a corpus containing contradictory research claims from the biomedical literature. The corpus is made available to enable further research into this area and support the development of automated approaches to contradiction identification.