1 / 30

Darrell W. Gunter EVP / CMO Collexis Holdings, Inc. March 23, 2010

Spring Conference CONTENT: Uncovering the Value and Benefits of Semantic Technology Case Study #2 - Enriching the editor’s experience with peer review. Darrell W. Gunter EVP / CMO Collexis Holdings, Inc. March 23, 2010. Topics for our discussion today. The AACR situation

kita
Download Presentation

Darrell W. Gunter EVP / CMO Collexis Holdings, Inc. March 23, 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Spring ConferenceCONTENT: Uncovering the Value and Benefits of Semantic TechnologyCase Study #2 - Enriching the editor’s experience with peer review Darrell W. Gunter EVP / CMO Collexis Holdings, Inc. March 23, 2010

  2. Topics for our discussion today • The AACR situation • The Collexis technology • How the technology is applied to AACR’s situation • The benefits of the solution

  3. - The Situation • AACR wanted to achieve the following objectives • Expand their Peer Reviewer pool • Find the best reviewer based on a key concept • Find the best reviewer free of conflict • Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Peer Review process

  4. Collexis Technology Fingerprint Text KnowledgeBase

  5. Expert profiles from documents • Expert profiles are generated automatically from documents and publications • By “simple” aggregation of the document fingerprints • Right: Use of the expert profiles as “science marketing” by the John Hopkins University

  6. The Peer Review Process • Most important factor to ensure the quality of a journal • Peer review process – challenges and problems • Workload for the editor and editorial team • Reviewers only coming from a "inner circle" • Avoiding incompetent reviewers • How to identify the best reviewer? • How to discover conflicts of interest? • How to balance the workload of reviewers? • How to make the larger part of the selection process as easy so that it can be handled by administrative stuff? .... but still ensure a high quality of selected reviewers!

  7. Indexation Workflow • Verification of fingerprinting results within seconds

  8. Collexis Peer Reviewer Selection • Chosing the right reviewers is one of the core processes to ensure the quality of a journal • Identifying the reviewers is a very complicated and time-consuming process • Collexis expert fingerprints and extensive data mining to ensure matching expertise and to avoid conflicts of interest

  9. - the Foundation for Reviewer Selection • Fully launched in April 2008, BME is the first pre-populated scientific social network generated from PubMed articles • 1.8 million expert profiles generated with the Collexis disambiguation process • More than 30 million co-authorship based relations • 280,000+ registered users! Disambiguation quality is key for the success!

  10. Disambiguating Authors J. Smith • Using identifying elements, determine who’s who: • Name • Location • Co-Authors • Key Concepts • more… By using our disambiguation methods, we can tell who’s who within a set of source documentation, ensuring that our ‘Fingerprint’ is an accurate proxy for that individual’s expertise.

  11. Disambiguating Concepts • Disambiguate searches based on: • Synonyms • Related terms • Abbreviations • So without knowing MeSH, you can navigate MeSH. A search for “neoplasm” Searching for one concept doesn’t require that you know the technical MeSH term – the tools disambiguate concepts for you as well.

  12. Individual Fingerprints Applying Fingerprints to Organizational Units • What new publications and have been published? • Who are the emerging authors and where are they publishing? • Who is working together? • What are the emerging trends? • What do we know? Aggregated Fingerprints Aggregating individual fingerprints across organizational units allows for the organization to know what individuals know and what groups know together…

  13. 4 Steps to the right reviewer Indexing the manuscripts – basic requirement for the Collexis Reviewer selection Identifying the author within the Collexis expert database BiomedExperts.com to be able to calculate shortest paths Match the submitted manuscript against the expert database biomedexperts.com Result example: matching expertise found, but a direct co-authorship between the author and potential reviewer

  14. Reviewer Selection in 4 Steps Indexing the manuscripts – basic requirement for the Collexis Reviewer selection Identifying the author within the Collexis expert database BiomedExperts.com to be able to calculate shortest paths Match the submitted manuscript against the expert database biomedexperts.com Result example: matching expertise but only a single co-authorship degree of separation between author and potential reviewer

  15. Reviewer Selection in 4 Steps Indexing the manuscripts – basic requirement for the Collexis Reviewer selection Identifying the author within the Collexis expert database BiomedExperts.com to be able to calculate shortest paths Match the submitted manuscript against the expert database biomedexperts.com Result example: matching expertise with multiple co-author degrees of separation between author and potential reviewer

  16. Further steps • Contacting the reviewer • After entering an e-mail address an e-mail template can be generated incorporating the expert profile of the potential reviewer asking whether he would be willing to review • Automated e-mail to the top three candidates with tracking and voting • automatic assignment if one accepts the peer review offer / burden

  17. Research Profiles: Organizational Views

  18. Research Profiles: Research trends over time

  19. Research Profiles: Internal and External Coauthor Relationships

  20. Research Profiles: Visualizations of Research Network Relationships

  21. Technical Implementation • Collexis will provide the reviewer selection service in two ways Integrated as web services into workflow systems Peer Reviewer Platform

  22. Technical Implementation Integrated as web services into workflow systems Seamless integration Customized implementation possible – e.g. Study section builder functionalities Differentiation between internal and external reviewers Bulk processing of existing internal reviewers Licensing per article or journal XML upload of volume or copy & past of single articles Target groups: Publisher, journals, editors grant funding organizations Academic organizations for internal reviewing

  23. - The Situation • AACR wanted to achieve the following objectives • Expand their Peer Reviewer pool • Find the best reviewer based on a key concept • Find the best reviewer free of conflict • Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Peer Review process

  24. Key Benefits Reviewer Finder • Clarity of manuscript • Determine the best reviewer • Free of conflicts • More efficient and effective process • Ultimately increases profitability

  25. Collexis Reviewer Finder"Your Path To Expertise" Darrell W. Gunter gunter@collexis.com +1.973.454.3475

More Related