ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022
Generating high-fidelity privacy-conscious synthetic patient data for causal effect estimation with multiple treatments.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The future of large-scale experiments and their challenges in the digital era.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- Methods for Generating and Evaluating Synthetic Longitudinal Patient Data: A Systematic Review.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2026Review
- TabGraphSyn: Graph-Guided Latent Diffusion for High-Fidelity and Privacy-Conscious Clinical Data Generation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Generating synthetic electronic health record data: a methodological scoping review with benchmarking on phenotype data and open-source software.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- A review on generative AI models for synthetic medical text, time series, and longitudinal data.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Challenges and applications in generative AI for clinical tabular data in physiology.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2025Review
- Synthetic healthcare data utility with biometric pattern recognition using adversarial networks.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Synthetic data generation methods in healthcare: A review on open-source tools and methods.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Harnessing EHR data for health research.Nature medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past decade, there has been exponentially growing interest in the use of observational data collected as a part of routine healthcare practice to determine the effect of a treatment with causal inference models. Validation of these models, however, has been a challenge because the ground truth is unknown: only one treatment-outcome pair for each person can be observed. There have been multiple efforts to fill this void using synthetic data where the ground truth can be generated. However, to date, these datasets have been severely limited in their utility either by being modeled after small non-representative patient populations, being dissimilar to real target populations, or only providing known effects for two cohorts (treated vs. control). In this work, we produced a large-scale and realistic synthetic dataset that provides ground truth effects for over 10 hypertension treatments on blood pressure outcomes. The synthetic dataset was created by modeling a nationwide cohort of more than 580, 000 hypertension patient data including each person's multi-year history of diagnoses, medications, and laboratory values. We designed a data generation process by combining an adapted ADS-GAN model for fictitious patient information generation and a neural network for treatment outcome generation. Wasserstein distance of 0.35 demonstrates that our synthetic data follows a nearly identical joint distribution to the patient cohort used to generate the data. Patient privacy was a primary concern for this study; the ϵ-identifiability metric, which estimates the probability of actual patients being identified, is 0.008%, ensuring that our synthetic data cannot be used to identify any actual patients. To demonstrate its usage, we tested the bias in causal effect estimation of four well-established models using this dataset. The approach we used can be readily extended to other types of diseases in the clinical domain, and to datasets in other domains as well.
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.