ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022
Twenty Years of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Safe Harbor Provision: Unsolved Challenges and Ways Forward.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Business Associates' Involvement in US Health Care Data Breaches: Longitudinal Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Article
- Making the case for an International Childhood Cancer Data Partnership.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- A resource for Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes terms that may be associated with identifying information.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Large language models for efficient whole-organ MRI score-based reports and categorization in knee osteoarthritis.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Data linkage multiplies research insights across diverse healthcare sectors.Communications medicine · 2025Review
- From infectious diseases to chronic diseases: the paradigm shift of spatial epidemiology in disease prevention and control.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Community-Engaged Data Science (CEDS): A Case Study of Working with Communities to Use Data to Inform Change.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- The glycemic gap as a prognostic indicator in cardiogenic shock: a retrospective cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Observational
- For-profit versus non-profit cybersecurity posture: breach types and locations in healthcare organisations.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2024Article
- The Costs of Anonymization: Case Study Using Clinical Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Best Practices in Evolving Privacy Frameworks for Patient Age Data: Census Data Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- LionVu: A Data-Driven Geographical Web-GIS Tool for Community Health and Decision-Making in a Catchment Area.Geographies · 2023Article
- Geographic Information Systems as Data Sharing Infrastructure for Clinical Data Warehouses.Journal of the Society for Clinical Data Management · 2023Article
- Healthcare Breaches During COVID-19: The Effect of the Healthcare Entity Type on the Number of Impacted Individuals.Perspectives in health information managemen · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was an important milestone in protecting the privacy of patient data; however, the HIPAA provisions specific to geographic data remain vague and hinder the ways in which epidemiologists and geographers use and share spatial health data. The literature on spatial health and select legal and official guidance documents present scholars with ambiguous guidelines that have led to the use and propagation of multiple interpretations of a single HIPAA safe harbor provision specific to geographic data. Misinterpretation of this standard has resulted in many entities sharing data at overly conservative levels, whereas others offer definitions of safe harbors that potentially put patient data at risk. To promote understanding of, and adherence to, the safe harbor rule, this paper reviews the HIPAA law from its creation to the present day, elucidating common misconceptions and presenting straightforward guidance to scholars. We focus on the 20,000-person population threshold and the 3-digit zip code stipulation of safe harbors, which are central to the confusion surrounding how patient location data can be shared. A comprehensive examination of these 2 stipulations, which integrates various expert perspectives and relevant studies, reveals how alternative methods for safe harbors can offer researchers better data and better data protection. Much has changed in the 20 years since the introduction of the safe harbor provision; however, it continues to be the primary source of guidance (and frustration) for researchers trying to share maps, leaving many waiting for these rules to be revised in accordance with the times.
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.