ArticleScience advances2021
Using game theory to thwart multistage privacy intrusions when sharing data.
Article in Science advances, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applications and Concerns of ChatGPT and Other Conversational Large Language Models in Health Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- A reinforcement learning-based approach for dynamic privacy protection in genomic data sharing beacons.Genome biology · 2025Article
- A consensus privacy metrics framework for synthetic data.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- A decade of research on genetic privacy: the findings of the GetPreCiSe Center at Vanderbilt University.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Review
- HydraGAN: A Cooperative Agent Model for Multi-Objective Data Generation.ACM transactions on intelligent systems and technology · 2024Article
- PanDa Game: Optimized Privacy-Preserving Publishing of Individual-Level Pandemic Data Based on a Game Theoretic Model.IEEE transactions on nanobioscience · 2023Article
- Differentially private knowledge transfer for federated learning.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Managing re-identification risks while providing access to the All of Us research program.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- A Multifaceted benchmarking of synthetic electronic health record generation models.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Sociotechnical safeguards for genomic data privacy.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2022Review
- Supporting COVID-19 Disparity Investigations with Dynamically Adjusting Case Reporting Policies.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Person-specific biomedical data are now widely collected, but its sharing raises privacy concerns, specifically about the re-identification of seemingly anonymous records. Formal re-identification risk assessment frameworks can inform decisions about whether and how to share data; current techniques, however, focus on scenarios where the data recipients use only one resource for re-identification purposes. This is a concern because recent attacks show that adversaries can access multiple resources, combining them in a stage-wise manner, to enhance the chance of an attack’s success. In this work, we represent a re-identification game using a two-player Stackelberg game of perfect information, which can be applied to assess risk, and suggest an optimal data sharing strategy based on a privacy-utility tradeoff. We report on experiments with large-scale genomic datasets to show that, using game theoretic models accounting for adversarial capabilities to launch multistage attacks, most data can be effectively shared with low re-identification risk.
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.