EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy
Names
More detailed information about this field from each metasource.
EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy
metasource: Fairsharing.org
version: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
EDDA
metasource: Fairsharing.org
version: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
Names
More detailed information about this field from each metasource.
EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
EDDA
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
Names
More detailed information about this field from each metasource.
EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
EDDA
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportal
version: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
Terminology of study designs and publication types (beta version). Developed by the Evidence in Documents, Discovery, and Analysis (EDDA) Group. Tanja Bekhuis (PI); Eugene Tseytlin (Systems Developer); Ashleigh Faith (Taxonomist). Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pennsylvania, US. This work was made possible, in part, by the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, grant no. R00LM010943. Based on research described in Bekhuis T, Demner-Fushman D, Crowley RS. Comparative effectiveness research designs: an analysis of terms and coverage in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree. Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). 2013 April;101(2):92-100. PMC3634392. The terminology appearing in JMLA has been enriched with terms from MeSH, NCI Thesaurus (NCIT), and Emtree, the controlled vocabularies for MEDLINE, the National Cancer Institute, and Embase, respectively, as well as from published research literature. Variants include synonyms for preferred terms, singular and plural forms, and American and British spellings. Definitions, if they exist, are mainly from MeSH, NCIT, Emtree, and medical dictionaries. A class for Publication Type is included because investigators consider type and design when screening reports for inclusion in comparative effectiveness research. EDDA Study Designs and Publications by Tanja Bekhuis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Description
More detailed information about this field from each metasource.
Terminology of study designs and publication types (beta version). Developed by the Evidence in Documents, Discovery, and Analysis (EDDA) Group. Tanja Bekhuis (PI); Eugene Tseytlin (Systems Developer); Ashleigh Faith (Taxonomist). Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pennsylvania, US. This work was made possible, in part, by the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, grant no. R00LM010943. Based on research described in Bekhuis T, Demner-Fushman D, Crowley RS. Comparative effectiveness research designs: an analysis of terms and coverage in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree. Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). 2013 April;101(2):92-100. PMC3634392. The terminology appearing in JMLA has been enriched with terms from MeSH, NCI Thesaurus (NCIT), and Emtree, the controlled vocabularies for MEDLINE, the National Cancer Institute, and Embase, respectively, as well as from published research literature. Variants include synonyms for preferred terms, singular and plural forms, and American and British spellings. Definitions, if they exist, are mainly from MeSH, NCIT, Emtree, and medical dictionaries. A class for Publication Type is included because investigators consider type and design when screening reports for inclusion in comparative effectiveness research. EDDA Study Designs and Publications by Tanja Bekhuis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
The EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy (v2.0) was developed by the Evidence in Documents, Discovery, and Analytics (EDDA) Group: Tanja Bekhuis (Principal Scientist); Eugene Tseytlin (Systems Developer); Ashleigh Faith (Taxonomist); Faina Linkov (Epidemiologist). The EDDA Group is a division of TCB Research & Indexing LLC. This work was made possible, in part, by the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, grant no. R00LM010943. Foundational research is described in Bekhuis T, Demner Fushman D, Crowley RS. Comparative effectiveness research designs: an analysis of terms and coverage in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree. Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). 2013 April;101(2):92-100. PMC3634392. Coverage of the terminology appearing in JMLA was extended with terms from MeSH, NCI Thesaurus (NCI), Emtree, the HTA Database Canadian Repository [international repository for health technology assessment], and Robert Sandieson's synonym ring for research synthesis. Collected terms were enriched with terms from the NCI Metathesaurus. Variants include synonyms for preferred terms, singular and plural forms, and American and British spellings. Definitions, if they exist, are mainly from MeSH, NCI, Emtree, and medical dictionaries. A PDF of this taxonomy is available in ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3769.2406/1. The EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy by Tanja Bekhuis and Eugene Tseytlin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). For information about this license, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
metasource: Biontology / Bioportalversion: 2.0 extracted_at: 2022-11-04T11:10:15.597147, http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EDDA
Webpage:
http://edda.dbmi.pitt.edu/Webpage
More detailed information about this field from each metasource.
http://edda.dbmi.pitt.edu/
metasource: Fairsharing.orgversion: FAIRsharing.org: EDDA; EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy; DOI: https://doi.org/10.25504/FAIRsharing.2ffmsb; Last edited: Jan. 8, 2019, 1:38 p.m.; Last accessed: Jan 03 2022 7:11 p.m.
Need help integrating and/or managing biomedical data?