Hi all! Would be great if folks, as the resident experts, could help us define the community’s tag taxonomy. So far we are thinking of some like:
|o|Software programs|
|o|Coding languages |
|o|Data format |
|o|Data conversion |
|o|Metadata |
|o|Lrrk2|
|o|Gba|
|o|Snca|
|o|GWAS|
|o|PPMI|
|o|Fox Insight|
|o|Genetic Data|
|o|PRO Data|
|o|Community guidelines|
What else do you think would be useful?
|o|Data visualization |
|o|AMP-PD |
|o|Communication |
|o|Patient involvement |
|o|Knowledge sharing |
|o|Proteomics|
|o|Expression|
|o|Methylation|
|o|Biomarkers|
|o|Machine learning|
|o|AI|
FoxDEN
PRO
Patient-reported outcomes
metabolomics
data analysis
quality control
biostatistics
epidemiology
risk
progression
symptom
Will these tags have some kind of structure like MESH does?
For example, if someone uses a tag called “LRRK2” could it be possible for the tag “PD Genetics” to be considered in some way? For instance, if I were to search for “PD Genetics” would I find posts tagged with “LRRK2” also?
Regarding specific tags, I don’t have any additional suggestions beyond what my colleagues have already provided. I believe it’s important to exercise caution in using tags excessively, as it may lead to non-utilization. The tag system should be simple and practical. I propose starting with a hierarchical structure for tags, if feasible, and then expanding with specific tags as demands arise and are identified.
Agree that we don’t want to over-tag – @danieltds , based on what’s been listed so far, would you be willing to propose a hierarchy to govern them?
@maya.sanghvi , do you know if having parent/children tags is technically feasible in Discourse (or some other method for linking them?
I don’t think we can make a tag hierarchy, but that may be the role of categories? I.e., tags can create a higher level of resolution beneath categories. Hopefully as the tag taxonomy builds up it will be easier to sift through content based on tags.
I will probably edit my post along the way and I could use some help from others who have expertise in biological and “omics” data, which I don’t deal so often. I understood that Maya said we can’t have this structure in Discourse, and that we could focus on developing specific tags within each category. So here is my suggestion.
Related to PD
|o| PD - Clinical Data |
|o| PD - Genetics |
|o| PD - Neuroimaging |
|o| PD - Biomarkers |
|o| PD - Epidemiology |
|o| PD - Subtyping |
|o| PD - Risk Factors |
Related to Datasets
|o| PPMI |
|o| Fox Insight |
|o| BioINFO |
|o| PDBP |
|o| AMP-PD |
Related to Programming Languages and/or Platforms
|o| Python |
|o| R |
|o| Terra |
(I accept more suggestions in this topic)
Related to Data Access and Usage
|o| Data Visualization |
|o| Data Access |
|o| Data Interpretation |
|o| Machine Learning |
(I accept more suggestions in this topic)
I intentionally omitted specific terms such as LRRK2, GBA and SNCA because I think those could initially fit in the genetic data and, maybe in the future, have their own categories, but I’m open for discussion!
@danieltds has put in a lot of tags I had in mind and will not like to repeat.
Hi @danieltds I’ve been looking at tag structures a bit. One thing that we can do is restrict certain tags to certain Categories, thus creating a taxonomy of sorts within each category. Is that something that you’d find helpful, or is it better to have the tags span all of the Categories and not be restricted to one?
Hello @maya.sanghvi! I believe that both options would be acceptable, but for now, I think the best approach is to maintain a general structure of tags to avoid overcomplicating things. However, I can foresee a future where a more structured option, restricted to specific categories, will become the norm.
@danieltds @fbbriggs @paularp @hirotaka @jgottesman and FYI for everyone – we’ve just added a bunch of tags from this Topic to Discourse. The hierarchy structure does minimally exist for the tags, such that we can restrict their use to be accessible only after you use a parent tag. However, the structure is not visible on a post.
For now, here are the tags we have in the groups that we’ve added them. Let us know how you find using these, and whether anything is missing.
| DCoP Meta | Research Focus | Datasets | Data Access and Usage | Data Analysis | Genetic Data | Tools and Software |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta | Proteomics | Fox-Insight | Data-Format | Machine-Learning | LRRK2 | Python |
| How-To | Epidemiology | PPMI | Data-Sharing | Software-Programs | GBA | R |
| Community-Guidelines | Metabolomics | BioFIND | Genetic-Data | AI | SNCA | Terra |
| Discourse-Feedback | Neuroimaging | Data-Conversion | Data-Visualization | Methylation | Zenodo | |
| Getting-Started | Subtyping | Data-Embargo | Data-Interpretation | Genetics | GitHub | |
| Communication | Risk-Factors | Data-Access | Data-Analysis | GWAS | ||
| Grant-Compliance | Progression | Data-Format | Biostatistics | |||
| Networking | Patient-Experience | Data-Conversion | ||||
| Introductions | Biomarker | Metadata | ||||
| PDPB | ||||||
| AMP-PD | ||||||
| Fox-DEN | ||||||
| Data-Quality | ||||||
| Clinical-Data | ||||||
| PRO-Data |
Can we have tags for other omics types? I might be biased as someone who studies a lot of transcriptomics… but there are tags for “metabalomics” and “proteomics” but not “transcriptomics” or “genomics”, or even a general “omics” tag would be great.
TIA!
Good suggestion, Elizabeth! Thank you for thinking of it. I’ve just added genomics and transcriptomics tags.
Awesome! Thank you! 