Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22822040›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2013

Reducing patient re-identification risk for laboratory results within research datasets.

Ravi V Atreya, Joshua C Smith, Allison B McCoy, Bradley Malin, Randolph A Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Clinical Research Informatics: a Decade-in-Review.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Lost in Anonymization - A Data Anonymization Reference Classification Merging Legal and Technical Considerations.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Detecting the Presence of an Individual in Phenotypic Summary Data.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Ensuring privacy in the study of pathogen genetics.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2014
    Review
  14. Biomedical data privacy: problems, perspectives, and recent advances.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ravi V AtreyaDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37232-8340, USA. ravi.v.atreya@vanderbilt.edu
Joshua C Smith
Allison B McCoy
Bradley Malin
Randolph A Miller

Funding

MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007347 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHER S. · 1985 to 2023
$26.3M
Vanderbilt Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007450 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jessica S. Ancker, Bradley A. Malin · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
eMERGE Coordinating Center - Administrative SupplementU01HG006385 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI HARRIS, PAUL A. · 2011 to 2014
$5.4M
Vanderbilt Genome Electronic Records ProjectU01HG006378 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI RODEN, DAN M · 2011 to 2014
$4.0M
TIME:(Tools for Inpatient Monitoring using Evidence)for Safe &AppropriateTestingR01LM007995 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI MILLER, RANDOLPH A · 2004 to 2009
$2.1M
Technologies to Enable Privacy in Biomedical DatabanksR01LM009989 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MALIN, BRADLEY A. · 2009 to 2014
$1.6M
Evidence-based Diagnostic Tools for Translational and Clinical Research (eTfor2)R01LM010828 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI MILLER, RANDOLPH A · 2010 to 2012
$1.1M
Scientific Tools/Patient Privacy/Facilitate ResearchR01LM009018 · NLM · CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY · PI SWEENEY, LATANYA · 2006 to 2008
$924k
NHGRI NIH HHS 1U01HG006378NHGRI NIH HHS 1U01HG006385NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006378NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006385NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007347NIGMS NIH HHS T32GM07347NLM NIH HHS R01 LM007995NLM NIH HHS R01LM007995NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009018NLM NIH HHS R01LM009018NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009989NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010828NLM NIH HHS R01LM010828NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007450NLM NIH HHS T15LM007450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo try to lower patient re-identification risks for biomedical research databases containing laboratory test results while also minimizing changes in clinical data interpretation. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn our threat model, an attacker obtains 5-7 laboratory results from one patient and uses them as a search key to discover the corresponding record in a de-identified biomedical research database. To test our models, the existing Vanderbilt TIME database of 8.5 million Safe Harbor de-identified laboratory results from 61 280 patients was used. The uniqueness of unaltered laboratory results in the dataset was examined, and then two data perturbation models were applied-simple random offsets and an expert-derived clinical meaning-preserving model. A rank-based re-identification algorithm to mimic an attack was used. The re-identification risk and the retention of clinical meaning for each model's perturbed laboratory results were assessed.

resultsDifferences in re-identification rates between the algorithms were small despite substantial divergence in altered clinical meaning. The expert algorithm maintained the clinical meaning of laboratory results better (affecting up to 4% of test results) than simple perturbation (affecting up to 26%). DISCUSSION AND

conclusionWith growing impetus for sharing clinical data for research, and in view of healthcare-related federal privacy regulation, methods to mitigate risks of re-identification are important. A practical, expert-derived perturbation algorithm that demonstrated potential utility was developed. Similar approaches might enable administrators to select data protection scheme parameters that meet their preferences in the trade-off between the protection of privacy and the retention of clinical meaning of shared data.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory Information SystemsComputer SecurityConfidentialityElectronic Health RecordsMedical Record LinkageAlgorithmsBiomedical ResearchFeasibility StudiesHumansInformation DisseminationUnited States

Identifiers

PMID22822040
PMCPMC3555327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.