Skip to main content

Classifying Biomedical Abstracts Using Committees of Classifiers and Collective Ranking Techniques

  • Conference paper
Advances in Artificial Intelligence (Canadian AI 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 5549))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1778 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this work is to reduce the workload of human experts in building systematic reviews from published articles, used in evidence-based medicine. We propose to use a committee of classifiers to rank biomedical abstracts based on the predicted relevance to the topic under review. In our approach, we identify two subsets of abstracts: one that represents the top, and another that represents the bottom of the ranked list. These subsets, identified using machine learning (ML) techniques, are considered zones where abstracts are labeled with high confidence as relevant or irrelevant to the topic of the review. Early experiments with this approach using different classifiers and different representation techniques show significant workload reduction.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Gray, J.A., Haynes, R.B., Richardson, W.: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312(7023), 71–72 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. TrialStat corporation web resources, http://www.trialstat.com/

  3. Pedersen, T., Kulkarni, A., Angheluta, R., Kozareva, Z., Solorio, T.: An Unsupervised Language Independent Method of Name Discrimination Using Second Order Co-occurrence Features. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2006. LNCS, vol. 3878, pp. 208–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Rennie, J., Shih, L., Teevan, J., Karger, D.: Tackling the poor assumptions of naive bayes text classifiers. In: ICML 2003, Washington DC (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Su, J., Zhang, H., Ling, C.X., Matwin, S.: Discriminative Parameter Learning for Bayesian Networks. In: ICML 2008 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Freund, Y., Mason, L.: The alternating decision tree learning algorithm. In: Proceeding of the 16th International Conference on ML, Slovenia, pp. 124–133 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Freund, Y., Schapire, R.: Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. In: Thirteenth International Conference on ML, San Francisco, pp. 148–156 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kouznetsov, A. et al. (2009). Classifying Biomedical Abstracts Using Committees of Classifiers and Collective Ranking Techniques. In: Gao, Y., Japkowicz, N. (eds) Advances in Artificial Intelligence. Canadian AI 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5549. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01818-3_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01818-3_29

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-01817-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-01818-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics