DiseaseOrPhenotypicFeature <causes> DiseaseOrPhenotypicFeature (MONDO:0002325)

[sstemann]

Query: causeDentalErosion.json PK: 3c161995-0bb7-49f7-aae6-b0812ad994ee

[colleenXu]

Depending on what you're looking for (opioid stuff?), it may be better to change the unconstrained node/node with no IDs to NamedThing. query below, results at https://arax.ncats.io/?r=99e388c8-bf39-44c3-a775-f1cfeff501ad

dental erosion -> NamedThing query

``` { "message": { "query_graph": { "edges": { "e00": { "subject": "n0", "object": "n1" } }, "nodes": { "n0": { "ids": ["MONDO:0002325"], "categories": ["biolink:DiseaseOrPhenotypicFeature"] }, "n1": { "categories": ["biolink:NamedThing"] } } } } } ```

---

It may also be better use no predicate or include a causes_adverse_event / adverse_event_caused_by predicate. query below, results at https://arax.ncats.io/?r=f105b27d-362b-41b7-bd7e-c900301abda9

dental erosion -(adverse event caused by)-> NamedThing query

``` { "message": { "query_graph": { "edges": { "e00": { "subject": "n0", "object": "n1", "predicates": ["biolink:adverse_event_caused_by"] } }, "nodes": { "n0": { "ids": ["MONDO:0002325"], "categories": ["biolink:DiseaseOrPhenotypicFeature"] }, "n1": { "categories": ["biolink:NamedThing"] } } } } } ```

[brettasmi]

We have this sort of information under biolink:has_phenotype

https://arax.ncats.io/?r=e650359f-8a15-4f9f-acd9-c38d467e10cc

[mbrush]

We have this sort of information under biolink:has_phenotype

https://arax.ncats.io/?r=e650359f-8a15-4f9f-acd9-c38d467e10cc

@brettasmi - this is a side note, but wanted to follow up about it. We had discussed earlier that the predicate has_phenotype might be too strong given that these associations are based on co-occurrence of disease and phenotype terms in the literature. Have you guys given any more thought to this? We have (or can create) a dedicated predicate for associations based on literature co-occurrence (e.g. 'co-occurs in literature with'), that more directly describes the association in your data. Users can then decide for themselves if this co-occurrence is reason to conclude/hypothesize that the disease has the phenotype. Your call, just food for thought.