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

Subcortical brain volume, regional cortical thickness, and cortical surface area across disorders: findings from the ENIGMA ADHD, ASD, and OCD Working Groups

Objective Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are common neurodevelopmental disorders that frequently co-occur. We aimed to directly compare all three disorders. The ENIGMA consortium is ideally positioned to investigate structural brain alterations across these disorders. Methods Structural T1-weighted whole-brain MRI of controls (n=5,827) and patients with ADHD (n=2,271), ASD (n=1,777), and OCD (n=2,323) from 151 cohorts worldwide were analyzed using standardized processing protocols. We examined subcortical volume, cortical thickness and surface area differences within a mega-analytical framework, pooling measures extracted from each cohort. Analyses were performed separately for children, adolescents, and adults using linear mixed-effects models adjusting for age, sex and site (and ICV for subcortical and surface area measures). Results We found no shared alterations among all three disorders, while shared alterations between any two disorders did not survive multiple comparisons correction. Children with ADHD compared to those with OCD had smaller hippocampal volumes, possibly influenced by IQ. Children and adolescents with ADHD also had smaller ICV than controls and those with OCD or ASD. Adults with ASD showed thicker frontal cortices compared to adult controls and other clinical groups. No OCD-specific alterations across different age-groups and surface area alterations among all disorders in childhood and adulthood were observed. Conclusion Our findings suggest robust but subtle alterations across different age-groups among ADHD, ASD, and OCD. ADHD-specific ICV and hippocampal alterations in children and adolescents, and ASD-specific cortical thickness alterations in the frontal cortex in adults support previous work emphasizing neurodevelopmental alterations in these disorders

Virtual histology of cortical thickness and shared neurobiology in 6 psychiatric disorders

Importance Large-scale neuroimaging studies have revealed group differences in cortical thickness across many psychiatric disorders. The underlying neurobiology behind these differences is not well understood. Objective To determine neurobiologic correlates of group differences in cortical thickness between cases and controls in 6 disorders: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder (MDD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and schizophrenia. Design, Setting, and Participants Profiles of group differences in cortical thickness between cases and controls were generated using T1-weighted magnetic resonance images. Similarity between interregional profiles of cell-specific gene expression and those in the group differences in cortical thickness were investigated in each disorder. Next, principal component analysis was used to reveal a shared profile of group difference in thickness across the disorders. Analysis for gene coexpression, clustering, and enrichment for genes associated with these disorders were conducted. Data analysis was conducted between June and December 2019. The analysis included 145 cohorts across 6 psychiatric disorders drawn from the ENIGMA consortium. The numbers of cases and controls in each of the 6 disorders were as follows: ADHD: 1814 and 1602; ASD: 1748 and 1770; BD: 1547 and 3405; MDD: 2658 and 3572; OCD: 2266 and 2007; and schizophrenia: 2688 and 3244. Main Outcomes and Measures Interregional profiles of group difference in cortical thickness between cases and controls. Results A total of 12 721 cases and 15 600 controls, ranging from ages 2 to 89 years, were included in this study. Interregional profiles of group differences in cortical thickness for each of the 6 psychiatric disorders were associated with profiles of gene expression specific to pyramidal (CA1) cells, astrocytes (except for BD), and microglia (except for OCD); collectively, gene-expression profiles of the 3 cell types explain between 25% and 54% of variance in interregional profiles of group differences in cortical thickness. Principal component analysis revealed a shared profile of difference in cortical thickness across the 6 disorders (48% variance explained); interregional profile of this principal component 1 was associated with that of the pyramidal-cell gene expression (explaining 56% of interregional variation). Coexpression analyses of these genes revealed 2 clusters: (1) a prenatal cluster enriched with genes involved in neurodevelopmental (axon guidance) processes and (2) a postnatal cluster enriched with genes involved in synaptic activity and plasticity-related processes. These clusters were enriched with genes associated with all 6 psychiatric disorders. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, shared neurobiologic processes were associated with differences in cortical thickness across multiple psychiatric disorders. These processes implicate a common role of prenatal development and postnatal functioning of the cerebral cortex in these disorders

Pain, Analgesic Use, and Patient Satisfaction With Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery : A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The REGAIN (Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture) trial found similar ambulation and survival at 60 days with spinal versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery. Trial outcomes evaluating pain, prescription analgesic use, and patient satisfaction have not yet been reported. OBJECTIVE: To compare pain, analgesic use, and satisfaction after hip fracture surgery with spinal versus general anesthesia. DESIGN: Preplanned secondary analysis of a pragmatic randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02507505). SETTING: 46 U.S. and Canadian hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 50 years or older undergoing hip fracture surgery. INTERVENTION: Spinal or general anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS: Pain on postoperative days 1 through 3; 60-, 180-, and 365-day pain and prescription analgesic use; and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: A total of 1600 patients were enrolled. The average age was 78 years, and 77% were women. A total of 73.5% (1050 of 1428) of patients reported severe pain during the first 24 hours after surgery. Worst pain over the first 24 hours after surgery was greater with spinal anesthesia (rated from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]; mean difference, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.68]). Pain did not differ across groups at other time points. Prescription analgesic use at 60 days occurred in 25% (141 of 563) and 18.8% (108 of 574) of patients assigned to spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (relative risk, 1.33 [CI, 1.06 to 1.65]). Satisfaction was similar across groups. LIMITATION: Missing outcome data and multiple outcomes assessed. CONCLUSION: Severe pain is common after hip fracture. Spinal anesthesia was associated with more pain in the first 24 hours after surgery and more prescription analgesic use at 60 days compared with general anesthesia. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institut

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 science. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press