Re: Merging Databases

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Alan Ruttenberg
<alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Hugh Glaser<hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > And just in case you haven't found it, a load of these hard-won equivalences are collected together at sameas.org, such as
> > http://sameas.org/?uri=http://data.linkedct.org/resource/intervention/51572
>
> Caveat emptor, some of these hard won equivalences will be hard
> losses. The sameAs assertions are incorrect. They equate a description
> of the values of an independent variable in a clinical study to one of
> the drugs administered in the intervention, the drug Ramelteon.
>
> "Subjects demonstrating low sleep efficiencies and prolonged sleep
> latencies, will be randomly assigned to continue to receive SHI
> accompanied by either placebo or Ramelteon (8 mg). Matching placebo
> will be obtained and the medication pre-packaged and ordered based on
> the randomization results"
>

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree that for this case, sameAs is an
incorrect type for the links to other drug sources since intervention
is not necessarily a drug, and has a description associated with it.
We should treat drug as an entity for the sameAs links to make more
sense. I'm working on this and will let you all know once I update the
data source.

>
> It is not straightforward to figure this out, either - there is no
> obvious backlink that leads you back from
> http://data.linkedct.org/resource/intervention/51572 to the source of
> the information http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00576927
> where the quote used as the value of linkedct:description is found.
>

I will look into this as well. There might be a problem with the
version of the data source I've used, although the HTML pages have the
association between the intervention and the trial now.


Thanks,
Oktie

> While a person browsing this will be able to disambiguate, if you
> depend on these equivalences for any sort of reasoning you will land
> up dubious conclusions.
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> > Hugh
> >
> > On 20/07/2009 05:03, "Oktie Hassanzadeh" <oktie@cs.toronto.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Amrapali Zaveri <amrapali.zaveri@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am attempting to merge 3 databases: (i) Clinicaltrials.gov <http://clinicaltrials.gov/>  , (ii) Geonames <http://www.geonames.org/>  , (iii) FDA <http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/ucm135162.htm>  based on ontologies.
> >
> > There are RDF Triples already defined for (i) http://linkedct.org/index.html and there is already an ontology present for (ii) http://www.geonames.org/ontology/ . However, there is no ontology present for    the FDA database. The field "Zip Code" is common for all the three databases.
> >
> >
> > If the FDA datasets are not published as RDF yet, we can certainly take the lead in publishing them as a part of the Linking Open Drug Data [1] project.
> >
> > [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG/LODD
> >
> > LinkedCT already provides links to Geonames, but please let me know if you see any missing links.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Oktie
> >
> >
> > Could anyone suggest possibilities of how to merge the three databases, based on ontologies?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Regards,
> > Amrapali J Zaveri
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Received on Monday, 20 July 2009 20:12:33 UTC