Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36215114›Full record

SynthesisBriefings in bioinformatics2022

Open tools for quantitative anonymization of tabular phenotype data: literature review.

Anna C Haber, Ulrich Sax, Fabian Prasser, NFDI4Health Consortium

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Costs of Anonymization: Case Study Using Clinical Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anna C HaberHealth Data Science Center, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ulrich SaxDepartment of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Fabian PrasserHealth Data Science Center, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3172-3095
NFDI4Health Consortium

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 442326535
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precision medicine relies on molecular and systems biology methods as well as bidirectional association studies of phenotypes and (high-throughput) genomic data. However, the integrated use of such data often faces obstacles, especially in regards to data protection. An important prerequisite for research data processing is usually informed consent. But collecting consent is not always feasible, in particular when data are to be analyzed retrospectively. For phenotype data, anonymization, i.e. the altering of data in such a way that individuals cannot be identified, can provide an alternative. Several re-identification attacks have shown that this is a complex task and that simply removing directly identifying attributes such as names is usually not enough. More formal approaches are needed that use mathematical models to quantify risks and guide their reduction. Due to the complexity of these techniques, it is challenging and not advisable to implement them from scratch. Open software libraries and tools can provide a robust alternative. However, also the range of available anonymization tools is heterogeneous and obtaining an overview of their strengths and weaknesses is difficult due to the complexity of the problem space. We therefore performed a systematic review of open anonymization tools for structured phenotype data described in the literature between 1990 and 2021. Through a two-step eligibility assessment process, we selected 13 tools for an in-depth analysis. By comparing the supported anonymization techniques and further aspects, such as maturity, we derive recommendations for tools to use for anonymizing phenotype datasets with different properties.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchPrivacyData AnonymizationPhenotypeRetrospective Studiesdata anonymizationphenotypeprivacyreviewsoftware

Identifiers

PMID36215114
PMCPMC9677485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.