ReviewJMIR medical informatics2021
Data Anonymization for Pervasive Health Care: Systematic Literature Mapping Study.
Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Algorithms to anonymize structured medical and healthcare data: A systematic review.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2022Pooled it
- Anonymization of Portuguese Clinical Notes Using Large Language Models and Quantum-Enhanced Hybrid Architectures: Comparative Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a German High-Frequency Neonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care Dataset (AIx-Neo-Guard Dataset): Secondary Data Cohort Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Article
- Experience sampling methods require more than numbers.Communications psychology · 2026Review
- Digital art as a novel medium for health communication: enabling interactive interventions and reconstructing health experiences in public health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Digital inequality in Ecuador: a multivariate analysis of ICT access and use using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and ENEMDU 2025 data.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Article
- Computer assisted verbal autopsy: comparing large language models to physicians for assigning causes to 6939 deaths in Sierra Leone from 2019-2022.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Knowledge and Recommendations of Stakeholders Regarding Ethical Oversight of Data Science Health Research: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Protocol for a modified Delphi study of ethical oversight of data science health research (DSHR).BMJ open · 2025Article
- Engaging migrants and immigrants in genetics research.Nature genetics · 2025Review
- Enabling secure and self determined health data sharing and consent management.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- An empirical assessment of differential privacy in real-world observational data: a case-control study of asthma exacerbation in UK Biobank linked with electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Smart Healthcare: A Capability and Function-Oriented Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Facial Analysis for Plastic Surgery in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: A Comparative Evaluation of Multimodal Large Language Models.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- TriNetX and Real-World Evidence: A Critical Review of Its Strengths, Limitations, and Bias Considerations in Clinical Research.ASIDE internal medicine · 2025Article
- Enhancing Ophthalmic Diagnosis and Treatment with Artificial Intelligence.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- An Interdisciplinary Overview on Ambient Assisted Living Systems for Health Monitoring at Home: Trade-Offs and Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Enhancing healthcare outcome with scalable processing and predictive analytics via cloud healthcare API.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Automatic Laplacian-based shape optimization for patient-specific vascular grafts.Computers in biology and medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing the factors militating against the effective implementation of electronic health records (EHR) in Nigeria.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData science offers an unparalleled opportunity to identify new insights into many aspects of human life with recent advances in health care. Using data science in digital health raises significant challenges regarding data privacy, transparency, and trustworthiness. Recent regulations enforce the need for a clear legal basis for collecting, processing, and sharing data, for example, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (2016) and the United Kingdom's Data Protection Act (2018). For health care providers, legal use of the electronic health record (EHR) is permitted only in clinical care cases. Any other use of the data requires thoughtful considerations of the legal context and direct patient consent. Identifiable personal and sensitive information must be sufficiently anonymized. Raw data are commonly anonymized to be used for research purposes, with risk assessment for reidentification and utility. Although health care organizations have internal policies defined for information governance, there is a significant lack of practical tools and intuitive guidance about the use of data for research and modeling. Off-the-shelf data anonymization tools are developed frequently, but privacy-related functionalities are often incomparable with regard to use in different problem domains. In addition, tools to support measuring the risk of the anonymized data with regard to reidentification against the usefulness of the data exist, but there are question marks over their efficacy.
objectiveIn this systematic literature mapping study, we aim to alleviate the aforementioned issues by reviewing the landscape of data anonymization for digital health care.
methodsWe used Google Scholar, Web of Science, Elsevier Scopus, and PubMed to retrieve academic studies published in English up to June 2020. Noteworthy gray literature was also used to initialize the search. We focused on review questions covering 5 bottom-up aspects: basic anonymization operations, privacy models, reidentification risk and usability metrics, off-the-shelf anonymization tools, and the lawful basis for EHR data anonymization.
resultsWe identified 239 eligible studies, of which 60 were chosen for general background information; 16 were selected for 7 basic anonymization operations; 104 covered 72 conventional and machine learning-based privacy models; four and 19 papers included seven and 15 metrics, respectively, for measuring the reidentification risk and degree of usability; and 36 explored 20 data anonymization software tools. In addition, we also evaluated the practical feasibility of performing anonymization on EHR data with reference to their usability in medical decision-making. Furthermore, we summarized the lawful basis for delivering guidance on practical EHR data anonymization.
conclusionsThis systematic literature mapping study indicates that anonymization of EHR data is theoretically achievable; yet, it requires more research efforts in practical implementations to balance privacy preservation and usability to ensure more reliable health care applications.
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.