2014
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gku1011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disease Ontology 2015 update: an expanded and updated database of human diseases for linking biomedical knowledge through disease data

Abstract: The current version of the Human Disease Ontology (DO) (http://www.disease-ontology.org) database expands the utility of the ontology for the examination and comparison of genetic variation, phenotype, protein, drug and epitope data through the lens of human disease. DO is a biomedical resource of standardized common and rare disease concepts with stable identifiers organized by disease etiology. The content of DO has had 192 revisions since 2012, including the addition of 760 terms. Thirty-two percent of all … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
368
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 528 publications
(372 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
3
368
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The existence of the ontology portals [14][15][16][17] where the terminology from different research fields is collected in the form of ontology is just one of the assumptions to successfully use the terminology. The outcome of the survey highlighted that many laboratories use the standards developed just in the particular laboratory.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The existence of the ontology portals [14][15][16][17] where the terminology from different research fields is collected in the form of ontology is just one of the assumptions to successfully use the terminology. The outcome of the survey highlighted that many laboratories use the standards developed just in the particular laboratory.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore standardization is hidden to the user or it is offered as a list of standardized terms based on the standardization provided by one of the standardization portals [14][15][16][17].…”
Section: Standardizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Information for the genomic coordinates of chromosome breakpoints was extracted from the UCSC Genome Bioinformatics Site (https://genome.ucsc.edu/). Disease Ontology database (http://disease-ontology.org/), an open source ontology for the integration of biomedical data that is associated with human disease [Kibbe et al 2015], was used for extraction of ontology terms and identification numbers (DOID). Furthermore, the availability of ontology terms was also checked in The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) (http://www.who.int/classi fications/icd/en/) and The Vertebrate Trait Ontology (https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/VT) (VTO) databases.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the TCGA program from 2005 to 2014, over 30 cancers were studied using microarray and next-generation sequencing platforms, consequently producing large-scale data, such as gene expression, exon expression, miRNA, copy number variation (CNV), single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), loss of heterozygosity (LOH), mutations, DNA methylation, and protein expression. Referring to Disease Ontology (Kibbe et al, 2015) and the TCGA data matrix (TCGA data matrix, 2015), we developed a controlled vocabulary for the TCGA cancer type (Table 1) and high-throughput platform (Table 2). As shown in Tables 1 and 2, the TCGA-defined terms were used to standardize the program-generated data description; however, they are not the terms used in the full-text articles.…”
Section: Tcga Data Usage Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%