ArticlePloS one2022
Measuring re-identification risk using a synthetic estimator to enable data sharing.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proposal of a procedure to stratify the reidentification risk of medical data: RIMEDA.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Autoencoder-Enhanced Hierarchical Mondrian Anonymization via Latent Representations.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessing Local Differential Privacy for Compliance with the Personal Data Protection Law in Integrated Data Systems.PloS one · 2026Article
- A survey on UK researchers' views regarding their experiences with the de-identification, anonymisation, release methods and re-identification risk estimation for clinical trial datasets.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Utility and Privacy of Synthetic Breast Cancer Clinical Trial Data Sets.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- What constitutes adequate legal protection for the collection, use and sharing of mobility and location data in health care in South Africa?South African journal of science · 2023Article
- Validating a membership disclosure metric for synthetic health data.JAMIA open · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne common way to share health data for secondary analysis while meeting increasingly strict privacy regulations is to de-identify it. To demonstrate that the risk of re-identification is acceptably low, re-identification risk metrics are used. There is a dearth of good risk estimators modeling the attack scenario where an adversary selects a record from the microdata sample and attempts to match it with individuals in the population.
objectivesDevelop an accurate risk estimator for the sample-to-population attack.
methodsA type of estimator based on creating a synthetic variant of a population dataset was developed to estimate the re-identification risk for an adversary performing a sample-to-population attack. The accuracy of the estimator was evaluated through a simulation on four different datasets in terms of estimation error. Two estimators were considered, a Gaussian copula and a d-vine copula. They were compared against three other estimators proposed in the literature.
resultsTaking the average of the two copula estimates consistently had a median error below 0.05 across all sampling fractions and true risk values. This was significantly more accurate than existing methods. A sensitivity analysis of the estimator accuracy based on variation in input parameter accuracy provides further application guidance. The estimator was then used to assess re-identification risk and de-identify a large Ontario COVID-19 behavioral survey dataset.
conclusionsThe average of two copula estimators consistently provides the most accurate re-identification risk estimate and can serve as a good basis for managing privacy risks when data are de-identified and shared.
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.