Cited by 49Biomedical Text Mining and OntologiesSemantic Web and OntologiesBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

A Census of Disease Ontologies

Haendel, Melissa A., McMurry, Julie A., Relevo, Rose, Mungall, Christopher J., Robinson, Peter N., Chute, Christopher G.·2018·Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science

Abstract

For centuries, humans have sought to classify diseases based on phenotypic presentation and available treatments. Today, a wide landscape of strategies, resources, and tools exist to classify patients and diseases. Ontologies can provide a robust foundation of logic for precise stratification and classification along diverse axes such as etiology, development, treatment, and genetics. Disease and phenotype ontologies are used in four primary ways: ( a) search, retrieval, and annotation of knowledge; ( b) data integration and analysis; ( c) clinical decision support; and ( d) knowledge discovery. Computational inference can connect existing knowledge and generate new insights and hypotheses about drug targets, prognosis prediction, or diagnosis. In this review, we examine the rise of disease and phenotype ontologies and the diverse ways they are represented and applied in biomedicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-biodatasci-080917-013459

Cites

101 of 101 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Monarch Disease Ontology (Mondo) is emerging as a comprehensive, community-driven, and computationally-driven resource.

    “While numerous disease and phenotype ontologies exist (44), the Monarch Disease Ontology (Mondo) is emerging as a comprehensive, community-driven, and computationally-driven resource (45).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haendel, M. A., McMurry, J. A., Relevo, R., Mungall, C. J., Robinson, P. N., & Chute, C. G.
Affiliations
  • Oregon State University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Environmental Genomics and Systems Biology, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • Jackson Laboratory (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science
Published
2018-07-20
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
305-331
ISSN
2574-3414 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2802673730
Cited by
49
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Eli Lilly and Company
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
disease ontology, phenotype ontologies, disease classification, knowledge representation, clinical decision support, data integration, knowledge discovery, computational inference, drug target identification, outcome prediction, diagnosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review