ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2016
Optimizing annotation resources for natural language de-identification via a game theoretic framework.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- PanDa Game: Optimized Privacy-Preserving Publishing of Individual-Level Pandemic Data Based on a Game Theoretic Model.IEEE transactions on nanobioscience · 2023Article
- Using game theory to thwart multistage privacy intrusions when sharing data.Science advances · 2021Article
- Feasibility of capturing real-world data from health information technology systems at multiple centers to assess cardiac ablation device outcomes: A fit-for-purpose informatics analysis report.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Resilience of clinical text de-identified with "hiding in plain sight" to hostile reidentification attacks by human readers.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Leveraging text skeleton for de-identification of electronic medical records.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Article
- Making Sense of Big Textual Data for Health Care: Findings from the Section on Clinical Natural Language Processing.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2017Review
- Scalable Iterative Classification for Sanitizing Large-Scale Datasets.IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering · 2017Article
- Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? Costs and Benefits of Multiple Human Annotators for Clinical Text De-identification.Methods of information in medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveElectronic medical records (EMRs) are increasingly repurposed for activities beyond clinical care, such as to support translational research and public policy analysis. To mitigate privacy risks, healthcare organizations (HCOs) aim to remove potentially identifying patient information. A substantial quantity of EMR data is in natural language form and there are concerns that automated tools for detecting identifiers are imperfect and leak information that can be exploited by ill-intentioned data recipients. Thus, HCOs have been encouraged to invest as much effort as possible to find and detect potential identifiers, but such a strategy assumes the recipients are sufficiently incentivized and capable of exploiting leaked identifiers. In practice, such an assumption may not hold true and HCOs may overinvest in de-identification technology. The goal of this study is to design a natural language de-identification framework, rooted in game theory, which enables an HCO to optimize their investments given the expected capabilities of an adversarial recipient.
methodsWe introduce a Stackelberg game to balance risk and utility in natural language de-identification. This game represents a cost-benefit model that enables an HCO with a fixed budget to minimize their investment in the de-identification process. We evaluate this model by assessing the overall payoff to the HCO and the adversary using 2100 clinical notes from Vanderbilt University Medical Center. We simulate several policy alternatives using a range of parameters, including the cost of training a de-identification model and the loss in data utility due to the removal of terms that are not identifiers. In addition, we compare policy options where, when an attacker is fined for misuse, a monetary penalty is paid to the publishing HCO as opposed to a third party (e.g., a federal regulator).
resultsOur results show that when an HCO is forced to exhaust a limited budget (set to $2000 in the study), the precision and recall of the de-identification of the HCO are 0.86 and 0.8, respectively. A game-based approach enables a more refined cost-benefit tradeoff, improving both privacy and utility for the HCO. For example, our investigation shows that it is possible for an HCO to release the data without spending all their budget on de-identification and still deter the attacker, with a precision of 0.77 and a recall of 0.61 for the de-identification. There also exist scenarios in which the model indicates an HCO should not release any data because the risk is too great. In addition, we find that the practice of paying fines back to a HCO (an artifact of suing for breach of contract), as opposed to a third party such as a federal regulator, can induce an elevated level of data sharing risk, where the HCO is incentivized to bait the attacker to elicit compensation.
conclusionsA game theoretic framework can be applied in leading HCO's to optimized decision making in natural language de-identification investments before sharing EMR data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.