Show relationship type in G2D and other pages about monarch-ui HOT 9 CLOSED

Reopening.

My original requirement:

For G2D we want to list in order of priority, with pathogenic shown first.

this doesn't seem to be the current behavior

from monarch-ui.

This support has been added to biolink:

causal associations

https://api-dev.monarchinitiative.org/api/bioentity/disease/MONDO:0007947/genes?rows=10&association_type=causal

non-causal associations (FBN2 will be gone in the next data release)

https://api-dev.monarchinitiative.org/api/bioentity/disease/MONDO:0007947/genes?rows=10&association_type=non_causal

all associations

https://api-dev.monarchinitiative.org/api/bioentity/disease/MONDO:0007947/genes?rows=10

(or add &association_type=both)

from monarch-ui.

Relationship type is unreliable until SciGraph/golr-loader#35 is fixed

from monarch-ui.

We show relationship type now, although there are lots of arguments about how to do it, and whether we should apply the inverse if available. However, the basic issue this ticket is about is whether we are showing them, and we are. Closing this.

Examples:

• https://beta.monarchinitiative.org/disease/MONDO:0007947#gene
• https://beta.monarchinitiative.org/gene/HGNC:11180#variant

from monarch-ui.

relevant biolink tickets
monarch-initiative/biolink-api#274
biolink/ontobio#318

from monarch-ui.

Still to do here:

• identify and separate the association causes condition, then, add to a separate table, or a different tab, differentiating this from the rest of the results. Ideally, the API itself should sort things out.

• @jmcmurry said: in the causal relations table, would it be possible to omit the disease listing in the case of a leaf node? (is it possible to determine if something is a leaf node?)

• It would be ideal to be able to inherit the functionality from legacy app. @kshefchek mentioned that in the legacy app we would have a boolean that would let you know if you were looking at a leaf node.

from monarch-ui.

Until this is fixed, I think we should remove Marfan as a suggested example to click on. Thoughts? @iimpulse ?

from monarch-ui.

I think we need to choose say 5 diseases and do a really deep dive. I am worried that we are going to show medically inaccurate data, and in general I think we are trusting some of our sources too much. I happen to know Marfan well but there is no reason to believe that it is special in this regard. In general we should avoid having relations that imply causality unless we really trust a source.

from monarch-ui.

fixed with #224

from monarch-ui.