Back

A semi-automated tool for improving Assessments and Lab Tests data annotation in ImmPort

Tursi, A. R.; Fortriede, J. D.; Burns, K.; Saba, N.; Pirani, P.; Strub, M. D.; Dunn, P.; Schaefer, H.; Andorf, S.

2026-10-10 immunology
10.64898/2026.10.02.756287 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Public data sharing in immunological and clinical research is essential for transparency, reproducibility, and secondary analysis. However, many datasets in repositories such as ImmPort lack sufficient structured data to enable reuse. ImmPort's Assessments and Lab Tests templates -- which capture critical clinical information -- are often incomplete or omitted due to their complexity and the manual effort required. To address this challenge, an application with a graphical user interface requiring no programming was developed to facilitate population of these templates. The tool streamlines the submission process by reducing time and complexity for data contributors while ensuring template formatting. It integrates ImmPort files, study-specific data files, and a curated data dictionary to automate the mapping of study variables to the required fields within each template. The tool was evaluated on seven ImmPort studies with diverse designs. It successfully generated submission-ready templates that passed ImmPort's internal validation and will be incorporated into the repository. By improving the feasibility and completeness of templates, this approach enhances the quality, findability, and reusability of data within ImmPort.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.3%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Data
○ 209 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 3%
5.6%
Similar papers in this journal
4
BMC Medical Research Methodology
○ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
Similar papers in this journal
5
PLOS Digital Health
● 106 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.4%
6
PLOS Biology
● 486 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
7
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
◐ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
8
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
◐ 71 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.3%
10
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.8%
11
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.7%
12
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.7%
13
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
14
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 41%
2.4%
15
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.9%
16
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
17
Journal of Translational Medicine
○ 57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
18
Database
◐ 61 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
19
JAMIA Open
◐ 42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
Communications Medicine
○ 113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
21
Patterns
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Frontiers in Immunology
○ 638 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
23
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
24
Trials
○ 29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
25
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
● 38 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
26
JAMA Network Open
● 130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
27
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
28
npj Digital Medicine
○ 118 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
29
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
eBioMedicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%

"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.