Binkheder, SamarWu, Heng-YiQuinney, Sara K.Zhang, ShijunZitu, Md. MuntasirChiang, Chien-WeiWang, LeiJones, JosetteLi, Lang2023-01-112023-01-112022Binkheder, S., Wu, H. Y., Quinney, S. K., Zhang, S., Zitu, M., Chiang, C. W., ... & Li, L. (2022). PhenoDEF: a corpus for annotating sentences with information of phenotype definitions in biomedical literature. Journal of Biomedical Semantics, 13(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13326-022-00272-6https://hdl.handle.net/1805/30926Background Adverse events induced by drug-drug interactions are a major concern in the United States. Current research is moving toward using electronic health record (EHR) data, including for adverse drug events discovery. One of the first steps in EHR-based studies is to define a phenotype for establishing a cohort of patients. However, phenotype definitions are not readily available for all phenotypes. One of the first steps of developing automated text mining tools is building a corpus. Therefore, this study aimed to develop annotation guidelines and a gold standard corpus to facilitate building future automated approaches for mining phenotype definitions contained in the literature. Furthermore, our aim is to improve the understanding of how these published phenotype definitions are presented in the literature and how we annotate them for future text mining tasks. Results Two annotators manually annotated the corpus on a sentence-level for the presence of evidence for phenotype definitions. Three major categories (inclusion, intermediate, and exclusion) with a total of ten dimensions were proposed characterizing major contextual patterns and cues for presenting phenotype definitions in published literature. The developed annotation guidelines were used to annotate the corpus that contained 3971 sentences: 1923 out of 3971 (48.4%) for the inclusion category, 1851 out of 3971 (46.6%) for the intermediate category, and 2273 out of 3971 (57.2%) for exclusion category. The highest number of annotated sentences was 1449 out of 3971 (36.5%) for the “Biomedical & Procedure” dimension. The lowest number of annotated sentences was 49 out of 3971 (1.2%) for “The use of NLP”. The overall percent inter-annotator agreement was 97.8%. Percent and Kappa statistics also showed high inter-annotator agreement across all dimensions. Conclusions The corpus and annotation guidelines can serve as a foundational informatics approach for annotating and mining phenotype definitions in literature, and can be used later for text mining applications.enAttribution 4.0 Internationaladverse drug eventsbiomedical corpuselectronic health recordsArticle