ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
Understanding identifiability in secondary health data.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Worldwide willingness to share health data high but privacy, consent and transparency paramount, a meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondary health data are becoming important sources of information for health research. Unfortunately, there are few national guidelines outlining clear criteria for data custodians when adjudicating requests for access to these data. This presents a particular challenge to researchers and even public health officials interested in multi-jurisdictional analysis of health data. While some of the problem in developing consistent national standards may stem from differences in provincial privacy law, it may also be the result of imprecise terminology, particularly around the concept of identifiability. This commentary discusses the differences between identifiability and self-identification with the hope of contributing to a broader discussion establishing national guidelines for the use of secondary health data in research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21913585PMC6973589What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.