Closed mellybelly closed 9 years ago
Kent- hoping that you can find a way to get this on the website for our release. Maybe name the page: Human Phenotype Annotation guidelines with a caveat: (Note that these guidelines are intended for use with the PhenoTips application, but could be adapted for any application using the Human Phenotype Ontology)
Sure, I'll draft up a page for the above text.
@mellybelly Started on this and got side tracked and coming back to it now. The phenotips documenation page is geared towards entering data on their site. So I'm curious what we are documenting on the Monarch site. Would this be for general searching and the analyze page? Or will this serve as guidelines for collaborators?
Things like this seem very PhenoTips specific: "Gestation at delivery. Please record a numeric value in weeks, such as “38” or leave blank if unknown."
It would make the most sense for this to either be integrated into PhenoTips or managed on the phenotips github site where it could more easily be integrated into other PhenoTips material.
Every time we add documentation to our website, we are incurring a maintenance debt, compounded by the fact that we're (by deliberate decision) not using a CMS to manage our content. When the PhenoTips UI changes the docs will either become stale or there will be a complex coordination issue with the PhenoTips developers to keep things in sync.
I think it would be better to publish this using a mechanism like bioRxive, figshare (with much needed screenshots) or using our blogging platform, where it will be explicitly stamped with a date (removing the onus to be in sync).
Should we just post as a versioned file in the monarch repo and then point at that from Phenotips, UDP, Monarch app, etc?
E.g. as a markdown file? Easier to author. If you don't mind the geeky github header sidebars etc then this is my preferred route.
ok tell me where to put it and what to do it and I'll do it :-)
Do we have a convention for managing the versioning?
How acceptable is this?
Specific versions can be referenced using the usual github mechanisms
If this is too ugly we can use pandoc to convert to html then wrap in the monarch headers and include as a bon-fide page (getting into a role-your-own CMS here...)
I like it. Kent, why don't you just put a pointer in the app to this and I'll learn to edit markdown and keep it up to date.
Can we come up with a version referencing scheme goes beyond github commit IDs? Those numbers will be completely opaque. It might be useful for users to be able to say "this was annotated with respect to guidelines version x, so it has some items that weren't in version x-1.."...
I've added a link to the github page under the documentation menu, is this what we were thinking?
I noticed that we still have our phenotype curation guidelines pointing to github, should I update this to point to the new blog page?
yes please, nice catch!
We should include some doc on patient phenotyping on our site.
Here is a draft, should be edited/updated for our site:
Reporting phenotypes using structured data allows computational analyses within and across species. It is helpful if the person annotating thinks of the set of annotations as a query against all known phenotype profiles. Therefore, the set of phenotypes chosen for the annotation must be as specific as possible, and represent the most salient and important observable phenotypes. We have observed time and again that the performance of computational search algorithms improves if a comprehensive list of phenotypic features is used. Furthermore, the annotations should be limited to those features that are abnormal or considered potentially abnormal. Also note that not all facets of a patient phenotype can be annotated using structured vocabularies. The goal is not to represent everything possible, but rather to represent that which most aids these query functions. The vocabularies are a work in progress and your feedback is very valuable.
These guidelines are separated into two sections, the first should be implemented in a “getting started” or “help” menu of PhenoTips or in tool tips for each section, the second are to aid curators reviewing the content of PhenoTips output and are considered additional curation guidelines. Note that the focus here is on annotation of the phenotype data – there is a rough sketch of guidelines constructed for the other kinds of data recorded within PhenoTips, but the PhenoTips team and UDP should flesh these out as specific to the UDP use case. These guidelines have been made specific to the UDP implementation of PhenoTips.
PhenoTips Annotation Guidelines
Each of the following sections may be edited by clicking on the pencil icon to the right of the section header, visible when hovering over the title. The form autosaves, and there is also a save button on the bottom of the form.
Patient information
Prenatal and Perinatal History
Medical and Developmental History
Family History
Measurements
Clinical symptoms and physical findings
Click “This patient is clinically normal” for those patients/family members that have no known abnormal phenotypes.
Searching for Phenotypes. There are three methods to search for phenotypes. In both methods, you can autocomplete on any phenotype and add it directly to the record.
Choosing Phenotype terms. Your phenotype selections will show up under the “Current Selection” section over on the right panel of the Clinical symptoms section, where all of the selections from the different categories will be shown. This is where you will visualize the whole phenotype profile for the given patient.
Phenotype Annotation Sufficiency Meter This function appears at the top of the “Current Selection” section. This meter assesses the breadth and depth of your phenotype annotation profile using a five-star rating system for a given patient in the context of all curated human and model organism phenotypes. The goal is to make your annotation profile specific enough to exclude similar diseases and to identify model organisms with similar phenotypes that may have mutations in relevant genes or pathways. The patient annotation profile is also used to aid exome prioritization using the same technology.
Additional Phenotype Information
Term requests. In some cases, you may not be able to find the term you are looking for. The “Other” white box at the bottom of each category besides being used to search that category is also used to record user requests. This allows a free-text request, which will be sent to the HPO tracker and someone will follow up with you in the UDPICS system chat once the term has been implemented or if clarification is needed. Please make sure to include only one term per request and make it as descriptive as possible. A request may also be a refinement of existing terms, please feel free to reference these in the request. Please do not request: a. Acronyms b. Measurement values c. Collections of phenotypes, such as diseases or syndromes d. Genotype or chromosomal abnormalities (for example, Microarray Xp22.31 dup, maternally derived; ETFDH carrier) e. Identifiers - a human readable label is required f. Patient history (use the section above). g. Assays – however, observable phenotypes derived from a specific assay are fine. For example, “abnormal MRI” does not describe a phenotype, rather what made that MRI abnormal is the observed phenotype (instead, request “cerebral volume loss indicated by abnormal MRI”). h. Devices – similarly, do not request devices but rather the phenotypes that are addressed by their use. For example, “mitral valve prolapse via echocardiogram.” If you have questions about whether a term is applicable, please contact the Phenotype Team by emailing obo-human-phenotype@lists.sourceforge.net.
You Might Want to Check For In the yellow box underneath the “Browse Categories” one has the ability to indicate specific phenotypes that are known to improve differential diagnosis. Clicking on this header opens up a direct selection of these phenotype terms. Choice of these populates the Current Selection in the right hand panel.
Diagnosis. Note that generally, a disorder is used to annotate the patient profile because it was either: tested and confirmed to be either present or absent OR suspected based on the manifestations (phenotypes), but not yet tested.