The use of domain-specific concepts in biomedical text summarization

Information Processing and Management

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1765-1776

  Reeve, Lawrence H ^a   Han, Hyoil ^a   Brooks, Ari D ^b  

^a Drexel University   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Biomedicine; Concept chaining; Concept frequency; Text summarization

Indexed keywords

DATA ACQUISITION; DATA REDUCTION; INFORMATION USE; PATIENT TREATMENT; REDUNDANCY; SEMANTICS;

BIOMEDICAL TEXTS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONCEPT CHAINING; CORE INFORMATION; PHYSICIANS; SUMMARIZATION;

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING;

EID: 34547929926     PISSN: 03064573     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2007.01.026     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Baeza-Yates R., and Ribeiro-Neto B. Modern information retrieval. 1st ed. (1999), Addison-Wesley, Harlow, England
2. Barzilay, R., & Elhadad, M. (1997). Using lexical chains for text summarization. In Proceedings of the intelligent scalable text summarization workshop (ISTS'97) (pp. 10-18). ACL, Madrid, Spain.
3. Brooks, A. D., & Sulimanoff, I. (2002). Evidence-based oncology project. In Surgical oncology clinics of North America (pp. 3-10).
4. Carbonell, J., & Goldstein, J. (1998). The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In SIGIR '98: Proceedings of the 21st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 335-336). Melbourne, Australia. Available from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/290941.291025.
5. Cohen A.M., and Hersh W.R. A survey of current work in biomedical text mining. Briefings in Bioinformatics 6 1 (2005) 57-71
6. D'Avanzo, E., Magnini, B., & Vallin, A. (2004). Keyphrase extraction for summarization purposes: The LAKE system at DUC-2004. In Proceedings of the 2004 document understanding conference, Boston, USA.
7. Dalianis, H. (2000). SweSum - A text summarizer for Swedish No. TRITA-NA-P001(5). Stockholm, Sweden: NADA, KTH.
8. Dice L.R. Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26 (1945) 297-302
9. Doran, W. P., Stokes, N. S., Dunnion, J., & Carthy, J. (2004). Assessing the impact of lexical chain scoring methods and sentence extraction schemes on summarization. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on intelligent text processing and computational linguistics CICLing-2004 (Vol. 2945, pp. 627-635). Seoul, South Korea.
10. Edmundson H.P. New methods in automatic extracting. In: Mani I., and Maybury M.T. (Eds) (1999), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 23-42
11. Fellbaum C. WORDNET: An electronic lexical database (1998), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
12. Galley, M., & McKeown, K. (2003). Improving word sense disambiguation in lexical chaining. In Proceedings of the 18th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 1486-1488). Acapulco, Mexico.
13. Goldstein, J., Kantrowitz, M., Mittal, V., & Carbonell, J. (1999). Summarizing text documents: sentence selection and evaluation metrics. In SIGIR '99: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 121-128). Berkeley, California, United States. Availbale from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/312624.312665.
14. Hovy E.H. Automated text summarization. In: Mitkov R. (Ed). The oxford handbook of computational linguistics (2005), Oxford University Press, Oxford 583-598
15. Hovy E., and Lin C. Automated text summarization in SUMMARIST. In: Mani I., and Maybury M.T. (Eds). Advances in automatic text summarization (1999), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 81-94
16. In: Jaques D.P. (Ed). Surgical oncology clinics of North America: Prospective randomized clinical trials in oncology. 1st ed. (2002), W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA, USA
17. Lee D.L., Chuang H., and Seamons K. Document ranking and the vector-space model. Software, IEEE 14 2 (1997) 67-75
18. Lin, C. (2004). Looking for a few good metrics: Automatic summarization evaluation - How many samples are enough? In Proceedings of the NTCIR workshop 4, Tokyo, Japan.
19. Lin, C., & Hovy, E. H. (2003). Automatic evaluation of summaries using N-gram co-occurrence statistics. In Proceedings of 2003 language technology conference (HLT-NAACL 2003) (Vol. 1(1), pp. 71-78). Edmonton, Canada.
20. Lin, C. (2005). Recall-oriented understudy for gisting evaluation (ROUGE). Retrieved August 20, 2005, from http://www.isi.edu/~cyl/ROUGE/.
21. Luhn H.P. The automatic creation of literature abstracts. IBM Journal of Research and Development 2 2 (1958) 159-165
22. Microsoft Coporation. (2002). Microsoft word 2002. Redmond, Washington, USA.
23. Morris J., and Hirst G. Lexical cohesion computed by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text. Computational Linguistics 17 1 (1991) 21-43
24. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2005). Document understanding conferences. Retrieved August 20, 2005, from http://www-nlpir.nist.gov/projects/duc/.
25. Nenkova, A., & Vanderwende, L. (2005). The impact of frequency on summarization No. MSR-TR-2005-101. Redmond, Washington: Microsoft Research.
26. Perry M.C., Kardinal C.G., Korzun A.H., Ginsberg S.J., Raich P.C., Holland J.F., et al. Chemohormonal therapy in advanced carcinoma of the breast: Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 8081. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 5 10 (1987) 1534-1545
27. Pollock J.J., and Zamora A. Automatic abstracting research at chemical abstracts service. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 15 4 (1975) 226-232
28. Radev, D., Allison, T., Blair-Goldensohn, S., Blitzer, J., Celebi, A., & Drabek, E. et al. (2004). MEAD - A platform for multidocument multilingual text summarization. In Proceedings of language resources and evaluation 2004 (LREC 2004). Lisbon, Portugal.
29. Rath G.J., Resnick A., and Savage R. The formation of abstracts by the selection of sentences [Electronic version]. American Documentation 2 12 (1961) 139-208
30. Reeve, L., Han, H., & Brooks, A. D. (2006). BioChain: Using lexical chaining methods for biomedical text summarization. In Proceedings of the 21st annual ACM symposium on applied computing, bioinformatics track (pp. 180-184). Dijon, France.
31. Reeve, L., Han, H., Nagori, S. V., Yang, J., Schwimmer, T., & Brooks, A. D. (2006). Concept frequency distribution in biomedical text summarization. In Proceedings of the ACM 15th conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM'06). Arlington, VA, USA.
32. Riethmuller G., Holz E., Schlimok G., Schmiegel W., Raab R., Hoffken K., et al. Monoclonal antibody therapy for resected Dukes' C colorectal cancer: Seven-year outcome of a multicenter randomized trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 16 5 (1998) 1788-1794
33. Rotem, N. (2003). Open text summarizer (OTS). Retrieved July 3, 2006, from http://libots.sourceforge.net.
34. Silber G.H., and McCoy K.F. Efficiently computed lexical chains as an intermediate representation for automatic text summarization. Computational Linguistics 28 4 (2002) 487-496
35. Sparck Jones K. Automatic summarizing: Factors and directions. In: Mani I., and Maybury M.T. (Eds). Advances in automatic text summarization (1999), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2-12
36. Subhash S. Applied multivariate techniques. 1st ed. (1996), John Wiley and Sons, USA
37. The Lemur Project. (2006). Lemur Language Modeling Toolkit. Retrieved July 3, 2006, from http://www.lemurproject.org/.
38. Thomas G., Dembo A., Ackerman I., Franssen E., Balogh J., Fyles A., et al. A randomized trial of standard versus partially hyperfractionated radiation with or without concurrent 5-fluorouracil in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecologic oncology 69 2 (1998) 137-145
39. United States National Library of Medicine. (2006a). PubMed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi.
40. United States National Library of Medicine. (2006b). UMLS Metathesaurus fact sheet. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/umlsmeta.html.
41. United States National Library of Medicine. (2005a). ClinicalTrials.gov. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.
42. United States National Library of Medicine. (2005b). MetaMap transfer. http://mmtx.nlm.nih.gov/.
43. United States National Library of Medicine. (2005c). Unified medical language system (UMLS). http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/.
44. United States National Library of Medicine. (2004). UMLS semantic network fact sheet. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/umlssemn.html.