SSDOnt: An Ontology for Representing Single-Subject Design Studies

Summary

Background: Single-Subject Design is used in several areas such as education and biomedicine. However, no suited formal vocabulary exists for annotating the detailed configuration and the results of this type of research studies with the appropriate granularity for looking for information about them. Therefore, the search for those study designs relies heavily on a syntactical search on the abstract, keywords or full text of the publications about the study, which entails some limitations.

Objective: To present SSDOnt, a specific purpose ontology for describing and annotating single-subject design studies, so that complex questions can be asked about them afterwards.

Methods: The ontology was developed following the NeOn methodology. Once the requirements of the ontology were defined, a formal model was described in a Description Logic and later implemented in the ontology language OWL 2 DL.

Results: We show how the ontology provides a reference model with a suitable terminology for the annotation and searching of single-subject design studies and their main components, such as the phases, the intervention types, the outcomes and the results. Some mappings with terms of related ontologies have been established. We show as proof-of-concept that classes in the ontology can be easily extended to annotate more precise information about specific interventions and outcomes such as those related to autism. Moreover, we provide examples of some types of queries that can be posed to the ontology.

Conclusions: SSDOnt has achieved the purpose of covering the descriptions of the domain of single-subject research studies.

Keywords

Single-subject research - ontology

• References

• 1 Kennedy CH. Single-case Designs for Educational Research. 1st ed. New York: Pearson; 2004
• 2 Lammers WJ, Badia P. Fundamentals of Behavioral Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Inc; 2005
• 3 Engel RJ, Schutt RK. The Practice of Research in Social Work. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2017
• 4 Janosky JE, Leininger SL, Hoerger MP. Single Subject Designs in Biomedicine. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York: Springer; 2009
• 5 Carter R, Lubinsky J. Rehabilitation Research: Principles and Applications. 5th ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2015
• 6 PubMed [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
• 7 Cochrane [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://www.cochranelibrary.com/
• 8 Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, Hayward RS. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club 1995; 123: A12-13.
• 9 Hernandez M, Falconer SM, Storey M, Carini S, Sim I. Synchronized tag clouds for exploring semistructured clinical trial data. Proceedings of the 2008 Conference of the Center for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research: Meeting of Minds, CASCON 2008; 42-56.
• 10 PubMed Clinical Queries [cited 2017 Oct 20]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/clinical
• 11 BioPortal [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://bioportal.bioontology.org/
• 12 Clinical Trials Ontology, CTO [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ ontologies/CTO
• 13 Ontology for Biomedical Investigations, OBI [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://obi-ontology.org/
• 14 Ontology of Clinical Research, OCRe [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/OCRE
• 15 OWL 2 DL [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
• 16 DL Query [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/DL_Query
• 17 Harris S, Seaborne A. editors. SPARQL 1.1 Query Language. W3C Recommendation, 2013 [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.w3.org/ TR/sparql11-query/
• 18 Suárez-Figueroa MC, Gómez-Pérez A, FernándezLópez M. The NeOn Methodology for Ontology Engineering. In: Suárez-Figueroa MC, GómezPérez A, Motta E, Gangemi A. editors. Ontology Engineering in a Networked World. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012: 9-34.
• 19 SSDOnt. Documentation [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://bdi.si.ehu.es/bdi/ontologies/SSDOnt/docs/SSDOnt.html
• 20 Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness DL, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider PF. editors. The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007
• 21 Protégé [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://protege.stanford.edu
• 22 D’Arcus B, Giasson F, Giasson F. editors. Bibliographic Ontology Specification, 2009 [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://http://bibliontology.com/
• 23 Semanticscience Integrated Ontology, SIO [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/SIO
• 24 Open Biomedical Ontologies, OBO [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: www.obofoundry.org/
• 25 Wong C, Odom SL, Hume K, Cox AW, Fettig A, Kucharczyk S. et al. Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Yound Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, Autism Evidence-Based Practice Review Group; 2013
• 26 Beckett D, Berners-Lee T, Prud’hommeaux E, Carothers G, Prud’hommeaux E, Carothers G. editors. RDF 1.1 Turtle: Terse RDF Triple Language. W3C Recommendation, 2014 [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/
• 27 CDISC Protocol Representation Model [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.cdisc.org/standards/foundational/protocol
• 28 ClinicalTrials.gov. A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov
• 29 Roumiantseva D, Carini S, Sim I, Wagner TH. Sponsorship and Design Characteristics of Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2013; 34: 348-355.
• 30 Wallace BC, Trikalinos TA, Lau J, Brodley C, Schmid CH. Semi-automated Screening of Biomedical Citations for Systematic Reviews. BMC Bioinformatics 2010; 11: 55.
• 31 Vrandecic D. Ontology evaluation. In: Staab S, Studer R. editors. Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2009: 293-313.
• 32 Tsarkov D, Horrocks I. Fact++ description logic reasoner: System description. In: Furbach U, Shankar N. editors. Automated Reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference, IJCAR 2006. Seattle, WA, USA: Lecture Notes in Computer Science; 2006. 4130 292-297.
• 33 GraphDB [cited 2017 Sep 20]. Available from: http://graphdb.ontotext.com/