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

Osteochondral Autograft: Proceedings of the International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle

Background: Treatment guidelines for cartilage lesions of the talus have been based on both low quality and low levels of evidence. Therefore, an international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions on key topics regarding cartilage lesions of the talus. The purpose of this consensus article is to explain the process and delineate the consensus statements derived from this consensus meeting on the use of “osteochondral autograft” for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Methods: Seventy-five international experts in cartilage repair of the ankle representing 25 countries and 1 territory were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Questions and statements were drafted within 11 working groups focusing on specific topics within cartilage repair of the ankle, after which a comprehensive literature review was performed and the available evidence for each statement was graded. Discussion and debate occurred in cases where statements were not agreed upon in unanimous fashion within the working groups. A final vote was then held, and the strength of consensus was characterized as follows: consensus, 51% to 74%; strong consensus, 75% to 99%; and unanimous, 100%. Results: A total of 14 statements on osteochondral autograft reached consensus during the 2017 International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle. Two achieved unanimous support, 11 reached strong consensus (greater than 75% agreement), and 1 achieved consensus. All statements reached at least 67% agreement. Conclusions: This international consensus derived from leaders in the field will assist clinicians with osteochondral autograft as a treatment strategy for osteochondral lesions of the talus