IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i7d10.1007_s11192-021-03880-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards medical knowmetrics: representing and computing medical knowledge using semantic predications as the knowledge unit and the uncertainty as the knowledge context

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoying Li

    (Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences)

  • Suyuan Peng

    (National Institute of Health Data Science, Peking University)

  • Jian Du

    (National Institute of Health Data Science, Peking University)

Abstract

In China, Prof. Hongzhou Zhao and Zeyuan Liu are the pioneers of the concept “knowledge unit” and “knowmetrics” for measuring knowledge. However, the definition on “computable knowledge object” remains controversial so far in different fields. For example, it is defined as (1) quantitative scientific concept in natural science and engineering, (2) knowledge point in the field of education research, and (3) semantic predications, i.e., Subject-Predicate-Object (SPO) triples in biomedical fields. The Semantic MEDLINE Database (SemMedDB), a high-quality public repository of SPO triples extracted from medical literature, provides a basic data infrastructure for measuring medical knowledge. In general, the study of extracting SPO triples as computable knowledge unit from unstructured scientific text has been overwhelmingly focusing on scientific knowledge per se. Since the SPO triples would be possibly extracted from hypothetical, speculative statements or even conflicting and contradictory assertions, the knowledge status (i.e., the uncertainty), which serves as an integral and critical part of scientific knowledge has been largely overlooked. This article aims to put forward a framework for Medical Knowmetrics using the SPO triples as the knowledge unit and the uncertainty as the knowledge context. The lung cancer publications dataset is used to validate the proposed framework. The uncertainty of medical knowledge and how its status evolves over time indirectly reflect the strength of competing knowledge claims, and the probability of certainty for a given SPO triple. We try to discuss the new insights using the uncertainty-centric approaches to detect research fronts, and identify knowledge claims with high certainty level, in order to improve the efficacy of knowledge-driven decision support.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoying Li & Suyuan Peng & Jian Du, 2021. "Towards medical knowmetrics: representing and computing medical knowledge using semantic predications as the knowledge unit and the uncertainty as the knowledge context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6225-6251, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:7:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03880-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03880-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-03880-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-03880-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Chaomei & Song, Min & Heo, Go Eun, 2018. "A scalable and adaptive method for finding semantically equivalent cue words of uncertainty," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 158-180.
    2. Graciela Rosemblat & Melissa P. Resnick & Ione Auston & Dongwook Shin & Charles Sneiderman & Marcelo Fizsman & Thomas C. Rindflesch, 2013. "Extending SemRep to the public health domain," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(10), pages 1963-1974, October.
    3. Henry Small & Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2019. "Citations and certainty: a new interpretation of citation counts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1079-1092, March.
    4. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    5. Small, Henry, 2018. "Characterizing highly cited method and non-method papers using citation contexts: The role of uncertainty," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 461-480.
    6. Alla Keselman & Graciela Rosemblat & Halil Kilicoglu & Marcelo Fiszman & Honglan Jin & Dongwook Shin & Thomas C. Rindflesch, 2010. "Adapting semantic natural language processing technology to address information overload in influenza epidemic management," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2531-2543, December.
    7. Alla Keselman & Graciela Rosemblat & Halil Kilicoglu & Marcelo Fiszman & Honglan Jin & Dongwook Shin & Thomas C. Rindflesch, 2010. "Adapting semantic natural language processing technology to address information overload in influenza epidemic management," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2531-2543, December.
    8. Chen, Chaomei & Chen, Yue & Horowitz, Mark & Hou, Haiyan & Liu, Zeyuan & Pellegrino, Donald, 2009. "Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 191-209.
    9. Graciela Rosemblat & Melissa P. Resnick & Ione Auston & Dongwook Shin & Charles Sneiderman & Marcelo Fizsman & Thomas C. Rindflesch, 2013. "Extending SemRep to the public health domain," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(10), pages 1963-1974, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hou, Jianhua & Wang, Dongyi & Li, Jing, 2022. "A new method for measuring the originality of academic articles based on knowledge units in semantic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    2. Shiyun Wang & Jin Mao & Yujie Cao & Gang Li, 2022. "Integrated knowledge content in an interdisciplinary field: identification, classification, and application," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6581-6614, November.
    3. Riad Alharbey & Jong In Kim & Ali Daud & Min Song & Abdulrahman A. Alshdadi & Malik Khizar Hayat, 2022. "Indexing important drugs from medical literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2661-2681, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lutz Bornmann & K. Brad Wray & Robin Haunschild, 2020. "Citation concept analysis (CCA): a new form of citation analysis revealing the usefulness of concepts for other researchers illustrated by exemplary case studies including classic books by Thomas S. K," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1051-1074, February.
    2. Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang & Chaomei Chen, 2020. "Measuring researchers’ potential scholarly impact with structural variations: Four types of researchers in information science (1979–2018)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-26, June.
    3. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    4. Gao, Qiang & Liang, Zhentao & Wang, Ping & Hou, Jingrui & Chen, Xiuxiu & Liu, Manman, 2021. "Potential index: Revealing the future impact of research topics based on current knowledge networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    5. Xuefeng Wang & Huichao Ren & Yun Chen & Yuqin Liu & Yali Qiao & Ying Huang, 2019. "Measuring patent similarity with SAO semantic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Souzanchi Kashani, Ebrahim & Roshani, Saeed, 2019. "Evolution of innovation system literature: Intellectual bases and emerging trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 68-80.
    7. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez & Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez, 2017. "Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 195-217, October.
    8. Huamei Shao & Gunwoo Kim & Qing Li & Galen Newman, 2021. "Web of Science-Based Green Infrastructure: A Bibliometric Analysis in CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Hamid Darvish & Yaşar Tonta, 2016. "Diffusion of nanotechnology knowledge in Turkey and its network structure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 569-592, May.
    10. Jake R. Nelson & Tony H. Grubesic, 2018. "Environmental Justice: A Panoptic Overview Using Scientometrics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    12. Francisco Diez-Martin & Alicia Blanco-Gonzalez & Camilo Prado-Roman, 2019. "Research Challenges in Digital Marketing: Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, May.
    13. Francisco Díez-Martín & Alicia Blanco-González & Camilo Prado-Román, 2021. "The intellectual structure of organizational legitimacy research: a co-citation analysis in business journals," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1007-1043, May.
    14. Zhao Zhai & Ming Shan & Amos Darko & Albert P. C. Chan, 2021. "Corruption in Construction Projects: Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    15. Gohar Feroz Khan & Jacob Wood, 2015. "Information technology management domain: emerging themes and keyword analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 959-972, November.
    16. Yuqing Fang, 2015. "Visualizing the structure and the evolving of digital medicine: a scientometrics review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 5-21, October.
    17. Min, Chao & Bu, Yi & Sun, Jianjun, 2021. "Predicting scientific breakthroughs based on knowledge structure variations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    18. Fritze, Martin P. & Urmetzer, Florian & Khan, Gohar F. & Sarstedt, Marko & Neely, Andy & Schäfers, Tobias, 2018. "From Goods to Services Consumption: A Social Network Analysis on Sharing Economy and Servitization Research," SMR - Journal of Service Management Research, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 2(3), pages 3-16.
    19. Michelle Jin Yee Neoh & Alessandro Carollo & Mengyu Lim & Gianluca Esposito, 2023. "Hikikomori: A Scientometric Review of 20 Years of Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(9), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Han, Linlin & Shan, Zidan & Lei, Ming & Long, Suwan(Cheng), 2024. "A comparative study of international and Chinese digitization from the perspective of mapping knowledge domains," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(PB), pages 93-113.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:7:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03880-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.