2006
DOI: 10.1007/s10791-006-9002-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spelling correction in the PubMed search engine

Abstract: It is known that users of internet search engines often enter queries with misspellings in one or more search terms. Several web search engines make suggestions for correcting misspelled words, but the methods used are proprietary and unpublished to our knowledge. Here we describe the methodology we have developed to perform spelling correction for the PubMed search engine. Our approach is based on the noisy channel model for spelling correction and makes use of statistics harvested from user logs to estimate … Show more

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

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Medium search terms included typographical errors (e.g., physiotherapy progroms or resiential care) . Spelling is a great source of errors too, even in native English users of PubMed (Wilbur, Kim, & Xie, ). Examples of such orthographical errors from our data are fysiotherapy or multifactoriel intervention .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Medium search terms included typographical errors (e.g., physiotherapy progroms or resiential care) . Spelling is a great source of errors too, even in native English users of PubMed (Wilbur, Kim, & Xie, ). Examples of such orthographical errors from our data are fysiotherapy or multifactoriel intervention .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this study addresses string transformation in its narrow sense, in which a part of a source string is rewritten with a substring. Typical applications of this task include stemming, lemmatization, spelling correction (Brill and Moore, 2000;Wilbur et al, 2006;Carlson and Fette, 2007), OCR error correction (Kolak and Resnik, 2002), approximate string matching (Navarro, 2001), and duplicate record detection (Bilenko and Mooney, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, they spent a good deal of cumulative time trying to decide if entering a P2X‐prefix term would retrieve articles related to a gene, receptor, or both—and wondering how to distinguish between the two in the retrieved titles. For misspellings, current research proposes autospelling corrections; for problems with bibliographic formatting it proposes citation builders; for term ambiguity it suggests autocompleted terms accompanied by their conceptual categories (e.g., gene, disease, process; Eaton, ; Herskovic et al., , Ramampiearo & Li, 2011; Wilbur, Kim, & Xie, ). For our users, autocorrection to spelling would have increased querying efficiency as long as the program had given students control over when to launch the query.…”
Section: Discussion: Implications For Tool Support and Their Contribumentioning
confidence: 99%