Property talk:P9341

@UWashPrincipalCataloger: I added Number of Records, based on a MESH SPARQL query: Property:P9341#P4876 --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 12:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

• @Vladimir Alexiev: Thanks. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 17:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• @Vladimir Alexiev: I'm not sure how you got the number of ids 636. The list of qualifiers at https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/subhierarchy.html is much much smaller. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • @Vladimir Alexiev: @UWashPrincipalCataloger: There are currently 79 MeSH Qualifiers listed here in alphabetical order: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/qualifiers_scopenotes.html. This is our most up-to-date list. Pullen255 (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • @Vladimir Alexiev, Pullen255: I've revised the property for number of records and added the source for it. Thanks. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• I see what the problem was. I counted all meshv:Qualifier but there are different dataset versions (mesh2021, mesh2020, etc) that caused duplication.
  • I get 76 in mesh2021, try the query shown below at https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/query . @UWashPrincipalCataloger, Pullen255: Could you check against the 79 you got and report to NLM?
  • If you have a NLM contact, could you also tell them: each node (eg mesh2021:Q000002) should have a link (eg skos:inScheme or rdfs:isDefinedBy or void:inDataset) to its dataset version (eg mesh2021: ). The URL comparison that I'm doing below is a hack because URLs are supposed to be treated as opaque --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 13:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
PREFIX meshv: <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/vocab#>
PREFIX mesh: <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/>
PREFIX mesh2021: <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2021/>
PREFIX mesh2020: <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2020/>
PREFIX mesh2019: <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2019/>

select * {
  ?x a meshv:Qualifier; rdfs:label ?label
  filter(strstarts(str(?x),str(mesh:2021)))
} order by ?label

• @Vladimir Alexiev: Pullen255 is from NLM, so I'm sure that she has read this and will respond. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • @Pullen255:: to clarify: instead of the "filter" I should be able to use a direct link eg "?x skos:inScheme mesh:2021" (depending on what class "mesh:2021" has) --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 08:12, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
    • @Vladimir Alexiev: I've brought this to our team's attention and will let you know once we have discussed it. Pullen255 (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
    • I also meant to add the correct number is 76 not 79! The other page had a note I overlooked. Pullen255 (talk) 12:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
      • Data don't lie :-) --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 06:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
        • @Vladimir Alexiev: sorry for the delayed response! I've passed this information along and was told that the current graph should only have MeSH 2021 in it, so it shouldn't need any versioning filter. If you run this query (essentially the same one you ran above without the filter):

SELECT DISTINCT ?label
FROM <http://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh>
WHERE { ?qual a meshv:Qualifier; rdfs:label ?label . }
ORDER BY ?label

it shows the obsolete qualifiers at the top of the list so we can ignore those. For now, they are keeping the obsolete MeSH terms in the graph and do not plan on adding one of those links you suggested. Pullen255 (talk) 11:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

• @Pullen255: Cool! In addition to "[OBSOLETE] " in the label, they have "meshv:active false" --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply