Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Óscar E. Mendoza

dblp:331/4582 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0003-2725-2972ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 67% Data mining · 33%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Medical and health informatics · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › evaluation
benchmark dataset
0.712023
CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews · NeurIPS 2023
Data mining
dataset construction
0.712023
CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews · NeurIPS 2023
Information retrieval
systematic review
0.712023
CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews · NeurIPS 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

machine learning · 1.3classification · 1.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews
abstract
Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) play an essential role in summarising, synthesising and validating scientific evidence. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in using machine learning techniques to automate the identification of relevant studies for SLRs. However, the lack of standardised evaluation datasets makes comparing the performance of such automated literature screening systems difficult. In this paper, we analyse the citation screening evaluation datasets, revealing that many of the available datasets are either too small, suffer from data leakage or have limited applicability to systems treating automated literature screening as a classification task, as opposed to, for example, a retrieval or question-answering task. To address these challenges, we introduce CSMED, a meta-dataset consolidating nine publicly released collections, providing unified access to 325 SLRs from the fields of medicine and computer science. CSMED serves as a comprehensive resource for training and evaluating the performance of automated citation screening models. Additionally, we introduce CSMED-FT, a new dataset designed explicitly for evaluating the full text publication screening task. To demonstrate the utility of CSMED, we conduct experiments and establish baselines on new datasets.
Wojciech Kusa, Óscar E. Mendoza, Matthias Samwald, Petr Knoth, Allan Hanbury
NeurIPS2
2023 Effective matching of patients to clinical trials using entity extraction and neural re-ranking
abstract
INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials (CTs) often fail due to inadequate patient recruitment. Finding eligible patients involves comparing the patient's information with the CT eligibility criteria. Automated patient matching offers the promise of improving the process, yet the main difficulties of CT retrieval lie in the semantic complexity of matching unstructured patient descriptions with semi-structured, multi-field CT documents and in capturing the meaning of negation coming from the eligibility criteria. OBJECTIVES: This paper tackles the challenges of CT retrieval by presenting an approach that addresses the patient-to-trials paradigm. Our approach involves two key components in a pipeline-based model: (i) a data enrichment technique for enhancing both queries and documents during the first retrieval stage, and (ii) a novel re-ranking schema that uses a Transformer network in a setup adapted to this task by leveraging the structure of the CT documents. METHODS: We use named entity recognition and negation detection in both patient description and the eligibility section of CTs. We further classify patient descriptions and CT eligibility criteria into current, past, and family medical conditions. This extracted information is used to boost the importance of disease and drug mentions in both query and index for lexical retrieval. Furthermore, we propose a two-step training schema for the Transformer network used to re-rank the results from the lexical retrieval. The first step focuses on matching patient information with the descriptive sections of trials, while the second step aims to determine eligibility by matching patient information with the criteria section. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that the inclusion criteria section of the CT has a great influence on the relevance score in lexical models, and that the enrichment techniques for queries and documents improve the retrieval of relevant trials. The re-ranking strategy, based on our training schema, consistently enhances CT retrieval and shows improved performance by 15% in terms of precision at retrieving eligible trials. CONCLUSION: The results of our experiments suggest the benefit of making use of extracted entities. Moreover, our proposed re-ranking schema shows promising effectiveness compared to larger neural models, even with limited training data. These findings offer valuable insights for improving methods for retrieval of clinical documents.
Wojciech Kusa, Óscar E. Mendoza, Petr Knoth, Gabriella Pasi, Allan Hanbury
J. Biomed. Informatics2