Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Automated Contradiction Detection in Biomedical Literature

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition (MLDM 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10934))

Abstract

Medical literature suffers from inconsistencies between reported findings that answer the same research question. This paper introduces an automated two-phase contradiction detection model that integrates semantic properties as input features to a Learning-to-Rank framework, to accurately identify key findings of a research article. It also relies on negation, antonyms and similarity measures to detect contradictions between findings. The proposed technique is implemented and tested on a publicly available contradiction corpus 259 manually annotated abstracts. The performance is compared based on recall, precision and F-measure. Experimental evaluations prove the utility of the model and its contribution to the contradiction classification and extraction task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Corpus available at http://staffwww.dcs.shef.ac.uk/people/M.Stevenson/resources/bio_contradictions/.

  2. 2.

    https://github.com/rmit-ir/SummaryRank.

  3. 3.

    https://sourceforge.net/p/lemur/wiki/RankLib/.

  4. 4.

    https://spacy.io/.

References

  1. Alamri, A., Stevenson, M.: Automatic detection of answers to research questions from medline abstracts. In: Proceedings of BioNLP, vol. 15, pp. 141–146 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alamri, A., Stevensony, M.: Automatic identification of potentially contradictory claims to support systematic reviews. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM), pp. 930–937, November 2015. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBM.2015.7359808

  3. Alamri, A.: The detection of contradictory claims in biomedical abstracts. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sheffield (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alamri, A., Stevenson, M.: A corpus of potentially contradictory research claims from cardiovascular research abstracts. J. Biomed. Semant. 7(1), 36 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burges, C.J.: From ranknet to lambdarank to lambdamart: an overview. Learning 11(23–581), 81 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chapman, W.W., Bridewell, W., Hanbury, P., Cooper, G.F., Buchanan, B.G.: A simple algorithm for identifying negated findings and diseases in discharge summaries. J. Biomed. Inform. 34(5), 301–310 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, R.C., Spina, D., Croft, W.B., Sanderson, M., Scholer, F.: Harnessing semantics for answer sentence retrieval. In: Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Exploiting Semantic Annotations in Information Retrieval, pp. 21–27. ACM (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chklovski, T., Pantel, P.: VerbOcean: mining the web for fine-grained semantic verb relations. In: EMNLP, vol. 4, pp. 33–40 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. De Marneffe, M.C., Rafferty, A.N., Manning, C.D.: Finding contradictions in text. In: ACL, vol. 8, pp. 1039–1047 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Del Corro, L., Gemulla, R.: Clausie: clause-based open information extraction. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 355–366. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harabagiu, S., Hickl, A., Lacatusu, F.: Negation, contrast and contradiction in text processing. In: AAAI, vol. 6, pp. 755–762 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ioannidis, J.P.: Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2(8), e124 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pavlopoulos, I., Aris Kosmopoulos, I.A.: Continuous space word vectors obtained by applying word2vec to abstracts of biomedical articles. Technical report, NLP Group, Department of Informatics, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece Institute of Informatics and Telecommunications, NCRS Demokritos, Greece (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jameson, J.L., Longo, D.L.: Precision medicine – personalized, problematic, and promising. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 70(10), 612–614 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: IR evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 41–48. ACM (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Li, L., Qin, B., Liu, T.: Contradiction detection with contradiction-specific word embedding. Algorithms 10(2), 59 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu, T.Y., et al.: Learning to rank for information retrieval. Found. Trends® Inf. Retrieval 3(3), 225–331 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Metzler, D., Kanungo, T.: Machine learned sentence selection strategies for query-biased summarization. In: SIGIR Learning to Rank Workshop, pp. 40–47 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Miller, G.A.: Wordnet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Padó, S., de Marneffe, M.C., MacCartney, B., Rafferty, A.N., Yeh, E., Manning, C.D.: Deciding entailment and contradiction with stochastic and edit distance-based alignment. In: TAC (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., Duchesnay, E.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Porter, M.F.: An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 14(3), 130–137 (1980). Google Scholar

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Prasad, V., Cifu, A., Ioannidis, J.P.: Reversals of established medical practices: evidence to abandon ship. Jama 307(1), 37–38 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Prasad, V., Vandross, A., Toomey, C., Cheung, M., Rho, J., Quinn, S., Chacko, S.J., Borkar, D., Gall, V., Selvaraj, S., et al.: A decade of reversal: an analysis of 146 contradicted medical practices. In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, vol. 88, pp. 790–798. Elsevier (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Preum, S.M., Mondol, A.S., Ma, M., Wang, H., Stankovic, J.A.: Preclude: conflict detection in textual health advice. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom), pp. 286–296. IEEE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ritter, A., Downey, D., Soderland, S., Etzioni, O.: It’s a contradiction–no, it’s not: a case study using functional relations. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 11–20. Association for Computational Linguistics (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sarafraz, F.: Finding conflicting statements in the biomedical literature. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. de Silva, N., Dou, D., Huang, J.: Discovering inconsistencies in pubmed abstracts through ontology-based information extraction. In: ACM Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, and Health Informatics (ACM BCB) (2017, p. to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sox, H.C., Greenfield, S.: Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the institute of medicine. Ann. Internal Med. 151(3), 203–205 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang, L., Ai, Q., Spina, D., Chen, R.-C., Pang, L., Croft, W.B., Guo, J., Scholer, F.: Beyond factoid QA: effective methods for non-factoid answer sentence retrieval. In: Ferro, N., et al. (eds.) ECIR 2016. LNCS, vol. 9626, pp. 115–128. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30671-1_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Arab Academy for Science, Technology, and Maritime Transport (AAST), Abukir, Alexandria, 1029, Egypt

    Noha S. Tawfik

  2. Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Noha S. Tawfik & Marco R. Spruit

Authors
  1. Noha S. Tawfik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco R. Spruit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noha S. Tawfik .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computer Vision and Applied Computer Sciences, Leipzig, Germany

    Petra Perner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Tawfik, N.S., Spruit, M.R. (2018). Automated Contradiction Detection in Biomedical Literature. In: Perner, P. (eds) Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition. MLDM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10934. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96136-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96136-1_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96135-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96136-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics