- From: Matthias Samwald <samwald@gmx.at>
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:43:24 +0200
- To: "public-semweb-lifesci" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Here is a small excerpt of the outcome of my SIDER conversion: http://hcls.deri.org/atag/data/SIDER_atags_excerpt.html Of course, listing aTags on a page in this manner is not very human-friendly, they should rather be embedded in a website with better navigation, split into several web pages. Note that you could just copy&paste some of the aTags to another HTML area, mix it with other RDFa, and the data would be carried with it ('client-side mashup'). I also encoded basic copyright and authorship information in RDFa. Triples in this page, extracted with Triplr.org: http://triplr.org/html/hcls.deri.org/atag/data/SIDER_atags_excerpt.html (or shorter: http://tinyurl.com/cerwpp) This is just a small excerpt, the entire file is several megabytes large. I still need to fix some issues with XML Literals in RDFa, and will then add the resulting triples of the full document to the HCLS KB. Cheers, Matthias -------------------------------------------------- From: "Peter Ansell" <ansell.peter@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:26 AM To: "Matthias Samwald" <samwald@gmx.at> Cc: "public-semweb-lifesci" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org> Subject: Re: drug side effects > 2009/4/29 Matthias Samwald <samwald@gmx.at>: >> I have also started to convert SIDER into aTags, but our two conversions >> will be complementary. What I am doing is mapping the information to the >> OBO >> disease ontology and to DBpedia (for drug names), and reusing OBO and >> DBpedia URIs directly. The conversion will be lossy when no matches are >> found in these resources, but it will be bound more tightly to OBO and >> DBpedia. > > I will have to investigate how aTags works more deeply. I developed my > own tagging vocabulary [1] but it hasn't seen many uses so far. From a > rough view, the terms:hasEvidence URI seems to map well to aTags > although it might be a bit specialised. Is [2] the only place aTags > are described? > >> The STITCH ids for chemicals seem to be equivalent to Pubchem in all >> cases I >> checked. Are there deviations? > > The STITCH and SIDER notes seem to indicate that they have reused the > pubchem identifiers, so owl:sameAs should be appropriate to > http://bio2rdf.org/pubchem:STITCHID. > >> By the way, some time back I also found two other datasets about drug >> side >> effects / pharmacovigilance data that could be used for conversions. >> >> Maximum Recommended Therapeutic Dose (MRTD) Database >> http://www.fda.gov/Cder/Offices/OPS_IO/MRTD.htm >> >> Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) Statistics >> http://www.fda.gov/cder/aers/extract.htm >> >> I will try to analyze those to see if they are worthwhile candidates for >> conversion. The AERS data is a bit complicated, and converting only some >> of >> the data might suffice. > > Partial rdfisations are still useful. If you release the script you > used to do it someone else can improve the coverage in the future if > needed. > >> Adverse events seem to be generally identified with terms from the MedDra >> dictionary (http://www.meddramsso.com), which is proprietary. I find this >> a >> bit irritating -- the entry barriers for institutions to create reports >> about adverse events should be as low as possible, which is not really >> helped by locking away the standard dictionary for codifying adverse >> events... > > It would be interesting to see what relationships are possible between > drugbank and these datasets, as drugbank is linked directly into a > large number of Bio2RDF datasets so the bridge from that point is > made. > > Cheers, > > Peter > > [1] http://bio2rdf.mquter.qut.edu.au/ns/terms > [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG_BioRDF_Subgroup/aTags
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2009 13:44:04 UTC