Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov;14(6):696-712.
doi: 10.1093/bib/bbs053. Epub 2012 Sep 8.

Evaluation of research in biomedical ontologies

Affiliations

Evaluation of research in biomedical ontologies

Robert Hoehndorf et al. Brief Bioinform. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Ontologies are now pervasive in biomedicine, where they serve as a means to standardize terminology, to enable access to domain knowledge, to verify data consistency and to facilitate integrative analyses over heterogeneous biomedical data. For this purpose, research on biomedical ontologies applies theories and methods from diverse disciplines such as information management, knowledge representation, cognitive science, linguistics and philosophy. Depending on the desired applications in which ontologies are being applied, the evaluation of research in biomedical ontologies must follow different strategies. Here, we provide a classification of research problems in which ontologies are being applied, focusing on the use of ontologies in basic and translational research, and we demonstrate how research results in biomedical ontologies can be evaluated. The evaluation strategies depend on the desired application and measure the success of using an ontology for a particular biomedical problem. For many applications, the success can be quantified, thereby facilitating the objective evaluation and comparison of research in biomedical ontology. The objective, quantifiable comparison of research results based on scientific applications opens up the possibility for systematically improving the utility of ontologies in biomedical research.

Keywords: biomedical ontology; evaluation criteria; ontology evaluation; ontology-based applications; quantitative biology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
A direct evaluation of an ontology can assess intrinsic properties of the ontology such as consistency, expressivity, or the inclusion of natural language definitions and labels. Furthermore, the evaluating person can examine definitions and axioms of the ontology and either agree or disagree with their content.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
An application-based evaluation does not directly assess an ontology, but rather evaluates an application that utilizes an ontology for its operations.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
An analysis-based evaluation performs a scientific data analysis that relies on an ontology and evaluates the success of the analysis using criteria established in the scientific domain.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C, et al. The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotech. 2007;25:1251–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Merrill GH. Ontological realism: methodology or misdirection? Appl Ontol. 2010;5:79–108. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith B, Ceusters W. Ontological realism: a methodology for coordinated evolution of scientific ontologies. Appl Ontol. 2010;5:139–88. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Obrst L, Ceusters W, Mani I, et al. The Evaluation of Ontologies: Toward Improved Semantic Interoperability. In: Baker CJO, Cheung K-H, editors. Semantic Web: Revolutionizing Knowledge Discovery in the Life Sciences. Springer: 2007. Science+Business Media, New York, NY, USA.
    1. Smith B. Proceeding of the 2008 Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference (FOIS 2008) pp. 21–35. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2008.

Publication types

MeSH terms