The Medical Action Ontology: A tool for annotating and analyzing treatments and clinical management of human disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Navigating the clinical literature to determine the optimal clinical management for rare diseases presents significant challenges. We introduce the Medical Action Ontology (MAxO), an ontology specifically designed to organize medical procedures, therapies, and interventions. METHODS: MAxO incorporates logical structures that link MAxO terms to numerous other ontologies within the OBO Foundry. Term development involves a blend of manual and semi-automated processes. Additionally, we have generated annotations detailing diagnostic modalities for specific phenotypic abnormalities defined by the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO). We introduce a web application, POET, that facilitates MAxO annotations for specific medical actions for diseases using the Mondo Disease Ontology. FINDINGS: MAxO encompasses 1,757 terms spanning a wide range of biomedical domains, from human anatomy and investigations to the chemical and protein entities involved in biological processes. These terms annotate phenotypic features associated with specific disease (using HPO and Mondo). Presently, there are over 16,000 MAxO diagnostic annotations that target HPO terms. Through POET, we have created 413 MAxO annotations specifying treatments for 189 rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS: MAxO offers a computational representation of treatments and other actions taken for the clinical management of patients. Its development is closely coupled to Mondo and HPO, broadening the scope of our computational modeling of diseases and phenotypic features. We invite the community to contribute disease annotations using POET (https://poet.jax.org/). MAxO is available under the open-source CC-BY 4.0 license (https://github.com/monarch-initiative/MAxO). FUNDING: NHGRI 1U24HG011449-01A1 and NHGRI 5RM1HG010860-04.
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 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".