Head and Tail Entity Fusion Model in Medical Knowledge Graph Construction: Case Study for Pituitary Adenoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pituitary adenoma is one of the most common central nervous system tumors. The diagnosis and treatment of pituitary adenoma remain very difficult. Misdiagnosis and recurrence often occur, and experienced neurosurgeons are in serious shortage. A knowledge graph can help interns quickly understand the medical knowledge related to pituitary tumor. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a data fusion method suitable for medical data using data of pituitary adenomas integrated from different sources. The overall goal was to construct a knowledge graph for pituitary adenoma (KGPA) to be used for knowledge discovery. METHODS: A complete framework suitable for the construction of a medical knowledge graph was developed, which was used to build the KGPA. The schema of the KGPA was manually constructed. Information of pituitary adenoma was automatically extracted from Chinese electronic medical records (CEMRs) and medical websites through a conditional random field model and newly designed web wrappers. An entity fusion method is proposed based on the head-and-tail entity fusion model to fuse the data from heterogeneous sources. RESULTS: Data were extracted from 300 CEMRs of pituitary adenoma and 4 health portals. Entity fusion was carried out using the proposed data fusion model. The F1 scores of the head and tail entity fusions were 97.32% and 98.57%, respectively. Triples from the constructed KGPA were selected for evaluation, demonstrating 95.4% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: This paper introduces an approach to fuse triples extracted from heterogeneous data sources, which can be used to build a knowledge graph. The evaluation results showed that the data in the KGPA are of high quality. The constructed KGPA can help physicians in clinical practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".