PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 14630664

BioWareDB: the biomedical software and database search engine.

M W Matthiessen
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

UNLABELLED: A wealth of bioinformatics tools and databases has been created over the last decade and most are freely available to the general public. However, these valuable resources live a shadow existence compared to experimental results and methods that are widely published in journals and relatively easily found through publication databases such as PubMed. For the general scientist as well as bioinformaticists, these tools can deliver great value to the design and analysis of biological and medical experiments, but there is no inventory presenting an up-to-date and easily searchable index of all these resources. To remedy this, the BioWareDB search engine has been created. BioWareDB is an extensive and current catalog of software and databases of relevance to researchers in the fields of biology and medicine, and presently consists of 2800 validated entries. AVAILABILITY: BioWareDB is freely available over the Internet at http://www.biowaredb.org/

Explore related subjects

Abstracting and IndexingBiomedical ResearchCatalogs as TopicDatabase Management SystemsDatabases, FactualInformation Storage and RetrievalInternetSoftwareJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M W Matthiessen. 2003-11-22. BioWareDB: the biomedical software and database search engine.. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics%2Fbtg306

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2005

Scientific papers presented at the European Congress of Radiology 2000: publication rates and characteristics during the period 2000-2004.

To determine the rate at which abstracts orally presented at the ECR 2000 were published between 2000-2004, and to identify predictive factors of publication and differences between abstracts and subsequently published papers. Specific search profiles were devised to retrieve items from the Medline database. From 1020 abstracts originating from 39 countries, 479 articles (publication rate 47%) were subsequently published in 139 Medline-indexed journals, most frequently in European Radiology (14%). Country of origin statistically (P<0.0001) influences the subsequent publication of the abstract, Germany having the highest number of presentations (n=343) and derived articles (publication rate 54%). Abstracts presented by authors from the USA (n=21) had the highest publication rate (76%). Most papers were published within the first 3 years after the meeting, as original articles and in English-language journals. Both the study sample size and the first author frequently changed. Chest and cardiac studies had the highest publication rates (56%, both). In summary, abstracts presented at the ECR 2000 had a high publication rate in Medline-indexed journals. Country of origin and subspecialty of presentation appeared to influence subsequent full publication. More articles were published in European Radiology than in other journal.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2005

Extraction of regulatory gene/protein networks from Medline.

MOTIVATION: We have previously developed a rule-based approach for extracting information on the regulation of gene expression in yeast. The biomedical literature, however, contains information on several other equally important regulatory mechanisms, in particular phosphorylation, which we now expanded for our rule-based system also to extract. RESULTS: This paper presents new results for extraction of relational information from biomedical text. We have improved our system, STRING-IE, to capture both new types of linguistic constructs as well as new types of biological information [i.e. (de-)phosphorylation]. The precision remains stable with a slight increase in recall. From almost one million PubMed abstracts related to four model organisms, we manage to extract regulatory networks and binary phosphorylations comprising 3,319 relation chunks. The accuracy is 83-90% and 86-95% for gene expression and (de-)phosphorylation relations, respectively. To achieve this, we made use of an organism-specific resource of gene/protein names considerably larger than those used in most other biology related information extraction approaches. These names were included in the lexicon when retraining the part-of-speech (POS) tagger on the GENIA corpus. For the domain in question, an accuracy of 96.4% was attained on POS tags. It should be noted that the rules were developed for yeast and successfully applied to both abstracts and full-text articles related to other organisms with comparable accuracy. AVAILABILITY: The revised GENIA corpus, the POS tagger, the extraction rules and the full sets of extracted relations are available from http://www.bork.embl.de/Docu/STRING-IE

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2005

A simplified search strategy for identifying randomised controlled trials for systematic reviews of health care interventions: a comparison with more exhaustive strategies.

BACKGROUND: It is generally believed that exhaustive searches of bibliographic databases are needed for systematic reviews of health care interventions. The CENTRAL database of controlled trials (RCTs) has been built up by exhaustive searching. The CONSORT statement aims to encourage better reporting, and hence indexing, of RCTs. Our aim was to assess whether developments in the CENTRAL database, and the CONSORT statement, mean that a simplified RCT search strategy for identifying RCTs now suffices for systematic reviews of health care interventions. METHODS: RCTs used in the Cochrane reviews were identified. A brief RCT search strategy (BRSS), consisting of a search of CENTRAL, and then for variants of the word random across all fields (random$.af.) in MEDLINE and EMBASE, was devised and run. Any trials included in the meta-analyses, but missed by the BRSS, were identified. The meta-analyses were then re-run, with and without the missed RCTs, and the differences quantified. The proportion of trials with variants of the word random in the title or abstract was calculated for each year. The number of RCTs retrieved by searching with "random$.af." was compared to the highly sensitive search strategy (HSSS). RESULTS: The BRSS had a sensitivity of 94%. It found all journal RCTs in 47 of the 57 reviews. The missing RCTs made some significant differences to a small proportion of the total outcomes in only five reviews, but no important differences in conclusions resulted. In the post-CONSORT years, 1997-2003, the percentage of RCTs with random in the title or abstract was 85%, a mean increase of 17% compared to the seven years pre-CONSORT (95% CI, 8.3% to 25.9%). The search using random$.af. reduced the MEDLINE retrieval by 84%, compared to the HSSS, thereby reducing the workload of checking retrievals. CONCLUSION: A brief RCT search strategy is now sufficient to locate RCTs for systematic reviews in most cases. Exhaustive searching is no longer cost-effective, because in effect it has already been done for CENTRAL.

Abstracting and Indexing↗