ArticlePloS one2021
CANDIDATE: A tool for generating anonymous participant-linking IDs in multi-session studies.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo ensure the privacy of participants is an ethical and legal obligation for researchers. Yet, achieving anonymity can be technically difficult. When observing participants over time one needs mechanisms to link the data from the different sessions. Also, it is often necessary to expand the sample of participants during a project.
objectivesTo help researchers simplify the administration of such studies the CANDIDATE tool is proposed. This tool allows simple, unique, and anonymous participant IDs to be generated on the fly.
methodSimulations were used to validate the uniqueness of the IDs as well as their anonymity.
resultsThe tool can successfully generate IDs with a low collision rate while maintaining high anonymity. A practical compromise between integrity and anonymity was achieved when the ID space is about ten times the number of participants. IMPLICATIONS: The tool holds potential for making it easier to collect more comprehensive empirical evidence over time that in turn will provide a more solid basis for drawing reliable conclusions based on research data. An open-source implementation of the tool that runs locally in a web-browser is made available.
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.