Closed vgardner-renci closed 3 years ago
@dkoslicki @edeutsch @CaseyTa request for update
I do not know what this means or the answer to the question..
@vgardner-renci I think this is something to ask the data modeling group. IIRC, COHD uses the correlated_with
predicate, but since there are at least three distinct kinds of edges (paired concept frequency, log observed/expected, and chi square p-value), we thought it best to be more specific.
What is the timeline for resolving this issue?
If this is for immediate ingest of COHD, I would suggest working with the correlated_with
predicate. Currently, COHD decides if there is an edge between a pair of concepts based on significance of the log observed/expected metric. The other metrics (chi-square, relative frequency) are currently tagging along as additional edge attributes on this edge.
There is more discussion on how to better model the "knowledge" from the clinical KPs in https://github.com/NCATSTranslator/minihackathons/issues/47. In the near future, we will adopt the temporary predicate has real world evidence of association with
, which will replace the correlated with
predicate while maintaining the same behavior described above. Distinct predicates to differentiate the various metrics available in COHD and other clinical KPs have not yet been established.
Leave it until what is showing up in RTX is the right predicate
@edeutsch will follow up
@edeutsch request for update
@vgardner-renci to check in with Eric
@edeutsch can you comment?
Update from Amy Glen, this is close to completion
Ok, we now use the predicate biolink:has_real_world_evidence_of_association_with
for all COHD edges - example: https://arax.ncats.io/?r=23658
So I think this issue is resolved.
https://arax.ncats.io/?source=ARS&id=597d0a89-013c-47cd-a296-ada21af6fa15