2012
DOI: 10.1007/s00335-012-9404-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computational tools for comparative phenomics: the role and promise of ontologies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
(99 reference statements)
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Due to the importance of integrating species-specific phenotype ontologies for biomedical research [50], several methods have been developed that specifically focus on the integration of phenotype ontologies. For example, PhenoHM [51] uses the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) MetaMap service [52] to map classes from MP to UMLS concepts describing disorders and phenotypes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to the importance of integrating species-specific phenotype ontologies for biomedical research [50], several methods have been developed that specifically focus on the integration of phenotype ontologies. For example, PhenoHM [51] uses the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) MetaMap service [52] to map classes from MP to UMLS concepts describing disorders and phenotypes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This strategy should elucidate the relationship between the clinical phenome (symptoms and signs) and integrate information from multi-scale omics data such as metabolomics, proteomics, transcriptomics, and genomics, which would yield more information on a biological process than the analysis of a single type of data [76] . However, the gathering of clinical phenotype data likely presents a greater challenge than high-throughput sequencing projects, due to the range of phenotype measurements and the complexity of the data [77] . The use of ontologies was proposed as an approach to semantic standardization [78] for semantically categorizing phenodeviance [79] such as Semantic Web technologies [80] , Systems Biology Markup Language [81] , and Web Ontology Language (OWL) [82,83] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, such comparisons have historically relied only on the expertise of researchers, and tended to make use of organism-specific language to describe phenotypes. The development of ontologies, formal hierarchies of descriptive annotations [28, 29 and 30], now allows researchers to find new human disease models by directly searching for homologous phenotypes using phenotype ontologies, an approach easily scalable to large phenotypic datasets. Multiple ontologies [31, 32 and 33] have been developed, enabling systematic analyses of phenotypes in a way that is descriptive, robust, programmatically accessible, and extensible across species.…”
Section: Finding Models Through Phenotype Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%