Putting Biomedical Ontologies to Work

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: Biomedical ontologies exist to serve integration of clinical and experimental data, and it is critical to their success that they be put to widespread use in the annotation of data. How, then, can ontologies achieve the sort of user-friendliness, reliability, cost-effectiveness, and breadth of coverage that is necessary to ensure extensive usage?

Methods: Our focus here is on two different sets of answers to these questions that have been proposed, on the one hand in medicine, by the SNOMED CT community, and on the other hand in biology, by the OBO Foundry. We address more specifically the issue as to how adherence to certain development principles can advance the usability and effectiveness of an ontology or terminology resource, for example by allowing more accurate maintenance, more reliable application, and more efficient interoperation with other ontologies and information resources.

Results: SNOMED CT and the OBO Foundry differ considerably in their general approach. Nevertheless, a general trend towards more formal rigor and cross-domain interoperability can be seen in both and we argue that this trend should be accepted by all similar initiatives in the future.

Conclusions: Future efforts in ontology development have to address the need for harmonization and integration of ontologies across disciplinary borders, and for this, coherent formalization of ontologies is a prerequisite.

• References

• 1 Medical Subject Headings (Internet).. Bethesda (MD): U S. National Library of Medicine.. Available from: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Health Level Seven International, Ann Arbor (MI).. Available from: http://www.hl7.org. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMed
• 3 The Gene Ontology Consortium.. 2004 The Gene Ontology (GO) database and informatics resource. Nucleic Acids Res 32: D258-D261. Available from: http://www.geneontology.org. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMed
• 4 Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C, Bard J, Bug W, Ceusters W. et al. The OBO Foundry: Coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nature Biotechnology 2007 pp 1251-1255. Available from http://obofoundry.org/. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Ruttenberg A, Clark T, Bug W, Samwald M, Bodenreider O, Chen H. et al. Advancing translational research with the Semantic Web. BMC Bioinformatics 2007; 8 (03) S2.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Smith B, Brochhausen M. Establishing and Harmonizing Ontologies in an Interdisciplinary Health Care and Clinical Research Environment. In: Blobel B, Pharow P, Nerlich M. editors. eHealth: Combining Health Telematics, Telemedicine, Biomedical Engineering and Bioinformatics to the Edge. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2008. pp 219-234.
  Google Scholar
• 7 Charter of the Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences (HCLS) Interest Group.. World Wide Web (W3C) Consortium. Available at: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/HCLSIGCharter. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Open GALEN Mission Statement.. Available from: http://www.opengalen.org. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMed
• 9 Ceusters W, Smith B, Goldberg L. A Terminological and Ontological Analysis of the NCI Thesaurus. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 498-507. The NCI Thesaurus is available from: http://nciterms.ncinih.gov/ncitbrowser/. Last accessed January 17, 2010.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation,. SNOMED CT: Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms. Available from: http://www.ihtsdo.org/snomed-ct. Last accessed January 17, 2010
• 11 Rubin DL, Noy NF, Richter JB. et al. The National Center for Biomedical Ontology: Advancing Biomedicine through Structured Organization of Scientific Knowledge. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 2006; 10 (02) 185-198. Available from: http://bioontology.org. Last accessed January 17, 2010.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Gene Ontology Consortium.. File Format Guide. Available from: http://www.geneontology.org/GO. format.shtml. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Gene Ontology Consortium.. Gene Ontology Annotation Database. European Bioinformatics Institute.; Available from: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/GOA. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  Google Scholar
• 14 OWL 2 Web Ontology Language.. W3C Recommendation. 27 October 2009. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax. Last accessed January 17, 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 OBO-OWL RESTful Conversion API. Berkeley (CA): Berkeley Bioinformatics Ontology Project.. Available from: http://www.berkeleybop.org/oboconv.cgi. Last accessedJanuary 17 2010
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Moreira DA, Musen MA. OBO to OWL: A Protégé tab to read/save OBO ontologies. Bioinformatics 2007; 23 (14) 1826-1870.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Ceusters W, Spackman KA, Smith B. Would SNOMED CT benefit from realism-based ontology evolution?. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2007; 11: 105-109.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Schulz S, Suntisrivaraporn B, Baader F. SNOMED CT’s Problem List: Ontologists’ and Logicians’ Therapy Suggestions. Stud Health Technol Inform 2007; 129: 802-806.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Smith B, Kusnierczyk W, Schober D, Ceusters W. Towards a reference terminology for ontology research and development in the biomedical domain. KR-MED 2006, biomedical ontology in action. Baltimore MD: 2006
  Google Scholar
• 20 Cimino JJ. Desiderata for controlled medical vocabularies in the Twenty-First Century. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37 4–5 394-403.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Bodenreider O, Smith B, Burgun A. The Ontology-Epistemology Divide: A Case Study in Medical Terminology. In: Varzi A, Vieu L. editors. Proc of the Int Conf on Formal Ontology and Information Systems (FOIS 2004), Turin, November 4-6, 2004. Amsterdam: IOS-Press; 2004. pp 185-195.
  Google Scholar
• 22 Andrews JE, Richesson RL, Krischer J. Variation of SNOMED CT coding of clinical research concepts among coding experts. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14 (04) 497-506.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Chiang MF, Hwang JC, Yu AC, Casper DS, Cimino JJ, Starren J. Reliability of SNOMED-CT coding by three physicians using two terminology browsers. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2006 pp 131-135.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Smith B, Williams J, Schulze-Kremer S. The Ontology of the Gene Ontology. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003 pp 609-613.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Smith B, Köhler J, Kumar A. On the Application of Formal Principles to Life Science Data: A Case Study in the Gene Ontology. In: Proceedings of DILS 2004 (Data Integration in the Life Sciences). Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics 2994. Berlin: Springer; 2004. pp 79-94.
  Google Scholar
• 26 Smith B, Ceusters W, Klagges B, Köhler J, Kumar A, Lomax J, Mungall C, Neuhaus F, Rector AL, Rosse C. Relations in biomedical ontologies. Genome Biol 2005; 6 (05) R46. Available at: http://genomebiology.com/2005/6/5/R46. Last accessed January 17, 2010.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 The Foundational Model of Anatomy (Internet). Seattle (WA): Structural Informatics Group, University of Washington. ©2008–10 (cited 2010 Jan 17). Structural Informatics Group, University of Washington; (1 screen). Available from: http://sig.biostr.washington.edu/projects/fm.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Rosse C, Mejino Jr JV. A reference ontology for biomedical informatics: the Foundational Model of Anatomy. J Biomed Inform 2003; 36 (06) 478-500.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (Internet). Copenhagen (Denmark): International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation. ©2010 (cited 2010 Jan 17). Available from: www.ihtsdo.org.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Donnelly K. Multilingual documentation and classification. In: Blobel B, Pharow P, Nerlich M. editors. eHealth: Combining Health Telematics, Telemedicine, Biomedical Engineering and Bioinformatics to the Edge. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2008. pp 235-244.
  Google Scholar
• 31 Rector A. Terminologies, Ontologies, & SNOMED (Internet). Freiburg (Germany): Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics; ©2006-10 (updated 2006 Oct 24; cited 2010 Jan 17). Health Informatics World Wide (67 pages). Available from: www.hiww.org/smcs2006/talks/Rector. ppt.
  Google Scholar
• 32 Basic Formal Ontology (Internet). Saarbrücken (Germany): ©2006-10 (updated 2009 Nov 5; cited 2010 Jan 17). Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Science (about 2 screens). Available from: http://www.ifomis.org/bfo.
  Google Scholar
• 33 Grenon P, Smith B, Goldberg L. Biodynamic Ontology: Applying BFO in the Biomedical Domain. In: Pisanelli DM. editor. Ontologies in Medicine. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2004. pp 20-38.
  Google Scholar
• 34 Smith B. From Concepts to Clinical Reality: An Essay on the Benchmarking of Biomedical Terminologies. J Biomed Inform 2006; 39 (03) 288-298.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Weber S. The Success of Open Source. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2004
  Google Scholar
• 36 Smith B. Ontology (Science). In: Eschenbach C, Grüninger M. editors. Proceeding of the 2008 Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems: Proceedings of the Fifth international Conference (FOIS 2008) Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 183. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2008. pp 21-35.
  Google Scholar