ArticlePLOS digital health2022
A proposed de-identification framework for a cohort of children presenting at a health facility in Uganda.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Algorithms to anonymize structured medical and healthcare data: A systematic review.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2022Pooled it
- Bridging Data, Semantics, and Clinical Reasoning: A Knowledge Graph Framework for Pediatric Obstructive Sleep Apnea.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Lessons learned from implementing FAIRification workflows in diabetes research in Germany.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Sensitive Data Detection with High-Throughput Machine Learning Models in Electrical Health Records.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data sharing has enormous potential to accelerate and improve the accuracy of research, strengthen collaborations, and restore trust in the clinical research enterprise. Nevertheless, there remains reluctancy to openly share raw data sets, in part due to concerns regarding research participant confidentiality and privacy. Statistical data de-identification is an approach that can be used to preserve privacy and facilitate open data sharing. We have proposed a standardized framework for the de-identification of data generated from cohort studies in children in a low-and-middle income country. We applied a standardized de-identification framework to a data sets comprised of 241 health related variables collected from a cohort of 1750 children with acute infections from Jinja Regional Referral Hospital in Eastern Uganda. Variables were labeled as direct and quasi-identifiers based on conditions of replicability, distinguishability, and knowability with consensus from two independent evaluators. Direct identifiers were removed from the data sets, while a statistical risk-based de-identification approach using the k-anonymity model was applied to quasi-identifiers. Qualitative assessment of the level of privacy invasion associated with data set disclosure was used to determine an acceptable re-identification risk threshold, and corresponding k-anonymity requirement. A de-identification model using generalization, followed by suppression was applied using a logical stepwise approach to achieve k-anonymity. The utility of the de-identified data was demonstrated using a typical clinical regression example. The de-identified data sets was published on the Pediatric Sepsis Data CoLaboratory Dataverse which provides moderated data access. Researchers are faced with many challenges when providing access to clinical data. We provide a standardized de-identification framework that can be adapted and refined based on specific context and risks. This process will be combined with moderated access to foster coordination and collaboration in the clinical research community.
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.