Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Improving Biomedical Knowledge Graph Quality: A Community Approach

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2508.21774 v1 pith:PD47LAX2 submitted 2025-08-29 q-bio.OT

Improving Biomedical Knowledge Graph Quality: A Community Approach

classification q-bio.OT
keywords biomedicalcriteriaknowledgeacrossessentialgraphsimprovingoften
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Biomedical knowledge graphs (KGs) are widely used across research and translational settings, yet their design decisions and implementation are often opaque. Unlike ontologies that more frequently adhere to established creation principles, biomedical KGs lack consistent practices for construction, documentation, and dissemination. To address this gap, we introduce a set of evaluation criteria grounded in widely accepted data standards and principles from related fields. We apply these criteria to 16 biomedical KGs, revealing that even those that appear to align with best practices often obscure essential information required for external reuse. Moreover, biomedical KGs, despite pursuing similar goals and ingesting the same sources in some cases, display substantial variation in models, source integration, and terminology for node types. Reaping the potential benefits of knowledge graphs for biomedical research while reducing wasted effort requires community-wide adoption of shared criteria and maturation of standards such as BioLink and KGX. Such improvements in transparency and standardization are essential for creating long-term reusability, improving comparability across resources, and enhancing the overall utility of KGs within biomedicine.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.