Automated approach for quality assessment of RDF resources

Special supplement issue on quality assurance and enrichment of biological and biomedical ontologies and terminologies

Ontologies and terminologies serve as the backbone of knowledge representation in biomedical domains, facilitating data integration, interoperability, and semantic understanding across diverse applications. However, the quality assurance and enrichment of these resources remain an ongoing challenge due to the dynamic nature of biomedical knowledge. In this editorial, we provide an introductory summary of seven articles included in this special supplement issue for quality assurance and enrichment of biological and biomedical ontologies and terminologies. These articles span a spectrum of topics, such as development of automated quality assessment frameworks for Resource Description Framework (RDF) resources, identification of missing concepts in SNOMED CT through logical definitions, and developing a COVID interface terminology to enable automatic annotations of COVID-19 related Electronic Health Records (EHRs). Collectively, these contributions underscore the ongoing efforts to improve the accuracy, consistency, and interoperability of biomedical ontologies and terminologies, thus advancing their pivotal role in healthcare and biomedical research.

Assessing resolvability, parsability, and consistency of RDF resources: a use case in rare diseases

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare data and the knowledge gleaned from it play a key role in improving the health of current and future patients. These knowledge sources are regularly represented as 'linked' resources based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF). Making resources 'linkable' to facilitate their interoperability is especially important in the rare-disease domain, where health resources are scattered and scarce. However, to benefit from using RDF, resources need to be of good quality. Based on existing metrics, we aim to assess the quality of RDF resources related to rare diseases and provide recommendations for their improvement.

METHODS

Sixteen resources of relevance for the rare-disease domain were selected: two schemas, three metadatasets, and eleven ontologies. These resources were tested on six objective metrics regarding resolvability, parsability, and consistency. Any URI that failed the test based on any of the six metrics was recorded as an error. The error count and percentage of each tested resource were recorded. The assessment results were represented in RDF, using the Data Quality Vocabulary schema.

RESULTS

For three out of the six metrics, the assessment revealed quality issues. Eleven resources have non-resolvable URIs with proportion to all URIs ranging from 0.1% (6/6,712) in the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification to 13.7% (17/124) in the WikiPathways Ontology; seven resources have undefined URIs; and two resources have incorrectly used properties of the 'owl:ObjectProperty' type. Individual errors were examined to generate suggestions for the development of high-quality RDF resources, including the tested resources.

CONCLUSION

We assessed the resolvability, parsability, and consistency of RDF resources in the rare-disease domain, and determined the extent of these types of errors that potentially affect interoperability. The qualitative investigation on these errors reveals how they can be avoided. All findings serve as valuable input for the development of a guideline for creating high-quality RDF resources, thereby enhancing the interoperability of biomedical resources.