Brain Injury Knowledge Ontology (BIKO) for traumatic brain injury: Formalizing concepts and methods used in translational traumatic brain injury research.
Surles-Zeigler, M.; Sincomb, T.; Dixon, C. E.; Imam, F.; Gillespie, T. H.; Grethe, J. S.; Ferguson, A. R.; Martone, M. E.
Show abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an insult to the brain resulting from an external force and is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. No effective clinical therapeutics currently exist for this injury. Although several therapies and procedures have been deemed successful for TBI treatment in preclinical research studies, they have yet to be translated into human patients. These discouraging results have left many scientists questioning the role of animal models in drug discovery for TBI. One major hurdle in translating the knowledge obtained in the laboratory to the clinic is the methodological variance across these studies. This variance can hinder the ability to draw conclusions from conflicting studies and aggregate data across various research studies, which ultimately impedes the ability to aggregate data across these studies. Therefore, addressing this variance is crucial for bridging the gap between the laboratory and the clinic. The increasing volume of papers and associated data being published every day makes this hurdle even more difficult to overcome. The initial steps to address these knowledge gaps are identifying these studies and creating a shared knowledge framework for mapping their terminology. We are developing the Brain Injury Knowledge Ontology (BIKO) to create a standardized model to describe methods and outcome measures used within preclinical and clinical TBI therapy studies to facilitate comparison across studies and models. The first version of BIKO focuses on modeling the major preclinical TBI models, e.g., Controlled Cortical Impact Model, Fluid Percussion Model, and Weight-Drop Model), major neurological injuries related to these models and their relationship to clinical pathophysiology. We show how BIKO provides a machine-readable way to represent the methodologies used in TBI therapeutic studies to compare models across clinically relevant features.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of common outcome measures for assessing independence in patients diagnosed with disorders of consciousness: A Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Study 88%
- Mortality and outcomes after decompressive craniectomy in children with severe traumatic brain injury 88%
- Natural Progression of Routine Laboratory Markers following Spinal Trauma: A Longitudinal, Multi-Cohort Study 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- tbiExtractor: A framework for Extracting Traumatic Brain Injury Common Data Elements from Radiology Reports 93%
- A method for rapid machine learning development for data mining with Doctor-In-The-Loop 91%
- Expanding Capabilities to Evaluate Readiness for Return to Duty after mTBI: The CAMP Study Protocol 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improved Injury Detection Through Harmonizing Multi-Site Neuroimaging Data after Experimental TBI: A Translational Outcomes Project in NeuroTrauma (TOP-NT) Consortium Study 90%
- Automatic quantification of brain lesion volume from post-trauma MR Images 89%
- Thalamo-Prefrontal Connectivity Correlates with Early Command-Following After Severe Traumatic Brain injury 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.