ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020
Reliability of Supervised Machine Learning Using Synthetic Data in Health Care: Model to Preserve Privacy for Data Sharing.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 156 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Applicability of Synthetic Data in the Development of Colorectal Cancer Survival Prediction Models: External Validation of Advanced Machine Learning Models Based on National Cancer Data Center Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- An integrated evaluation framework for synthetic clinical data in severely imbalanced settings: fidelity, privacy-risk profiling, and diagnostic utility.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Synthetic Data Generation and Nonparametric Techniques for Assessing Multivariate Similarity to Address Small-Sample Size Challenges.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Privacy-Aware Synthetic Tabular Data Generation for Healthcare: Application to Sepsis Detection.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deep generative hidden Markov models for synthetic patient data generation: a novel approach for medical AI research.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Identification of sensorineural hearing loss subtypes using unsupervised machine learning and assessment of their replicability.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A call for principle-based acceptance of synthetic patients: establishing the AI-driven foundation for regulatory submissions.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Comparative performance of four large language models in generating evidence-based exercise prescriptions using FITT-VP framework.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- TabGraphSyn: Graph-Guided Latent Diffusion for High-Fidelity and Privacy-Conscious Clinical Data Generation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- A consensus privacy metrics framework for synthetic data.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based models for screening of anemia and leukemia using features of complete blood count reports.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- MuTATE: an interpretable multi-endpoint machine learning framework for automated molecular subtyping in cancer.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Generating synthetic electronic health record data: a methodological scoping review with benchmarking on phenotype data and open-source software.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Leveraging Neural ODEs for Population Pharmacokinetics of Dalbavancin in Sparse Clinical Data.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Tabular transformer generative adversarial network for heterogeneous distribution in healthcare.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- From virtual to reality: innovative practices of digital twins in tumor therapy.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Addressing contemporary threats in anonymised healthcare data using privacy engineering.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Augmenting Insufficiently Accruing Oncology Clinical Trials Using Generative Models: Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Comprehensive evaluation framework for synthetic tabular data in health: fidelity, utility and privacy analysis of generative models with and without privacy guarantees.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Tempered enthusiasm by interviewed experts for synthetic data and ELSI checklists for AI in medicine.AI and ethics · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe exploitation of synthetic data in health care is at an early stage. Synthetic data could unlock the potential within health care datasets that are too sensitive for release. Several synthetic data generators have been developed to date; however, studies evaluating their efficacy and generalizability are scarce.
objectiveThis work sets out to understand the difference in performance of supervised machine learning models trained on synthetic data compared with those trained on real data.
methodsA total of 19 open health datasets were selected for experimental work. Synthetic data were generated using three synthetic data generators that apply classification and regression trees, parametric, and Bayesian network approaches. Real and synthetic data were used (separately) to train five supervised machine learning models: stochastic gradient descent, decision tree, k-nearest neighbors, random forest, and support vector machine. Models were tested only on real data to determine whether a model developed by training on synthetic data can used to accurately classify new, real examples. The impact of statistical disclosure control on model performance was also assessed.
resultsA total of 92% of models trained on synthetic data have lower accuracy than those trained on real data. Tree-based models trained on synthetic data have deviations in accuracy from models trained on real data of 0.177 (18%) to 0.193 (19%), while other models have lower deviations of 0.058 (6%) to 0.072 (7%). The winning classifier when trained and tested on real data versus models trained on synthetic data and tested on real data is the same in 26% (5/19) of cases for classification and regression tree and parametric synthetic data and in 21% (4/19) of cases for Bayesian network-generated synthetic data. Tree-based models perform best with real data and are the winning classifier in 95% (18/19) of cases. This is not the case for models trained on synthetic data. When tree-based models are not considered, the winning classifier for real and synthetic data is matched in 74% (14/19), 53% (10/19), and 68% (13/19) of cases for classification and regression tree, parametric, and Bayesian network synthetic data, respectively. Statistical disclosure control methods did not have a notable impact on data utility.
conclusionsThe results of this study are promising with small decreases in accuracy observed in models trained with synthetic data compared with models trained with real data, where both are tested on real data. Such deviations are expected and manageable. Tree-based classifiers have some sensitivity to synthetic data, and the underlying cause requires further investigation. This study highlights the potential of synthetic data and the need for further evaluation of their robustness. Synthetic data must ensure individual privacy and data utility are preserved in order to instill confidence in health care departments when using such data to inform policy decision-making.
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.