Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Nerve conduction studies and EMG in carpal tunnel syndrome: Do they add value?

This paper summarises the views of four experts on the place of neurophysiological testing (EDX) in patients presenting with possible carpal tunnel syndrome, in guiding their treatment, and in reevaluations. This is not meant to be a position paper or a literature review, and heterogeneous viewpoints are presented. Nerve conduction studies should be performed in patients presenting with possible carpal tunnel syndrome to assist diagnosis, and may need to be repeated at intervals in those managed conservatively. There is evidence that local corticosteroid injection is safe and effective for many patients, thereby avoiding or deferring surgical decompression. All patients should undergo EDX studies before any invasive procedure for CTS (injection or surgery). Needle EMG studies are not obligatory, but may be needed in those with severe disease and those in whom an alternate or concomitant diagnosis is suspected. Keywords: Carpal tunnel syndrome, Median neuropathy at the wrist, Nerve conduction studies, Needle EMG, Surgical decompression, Local injection of corticosteroids, Conservative managemen