ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2023
Improved angelization technique against background knowledge attack for 1:M microdata.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the advent of modern information systems, sharing Electronic Health Records (EHRs) with different organizations for better medical treatment, and analysis is beneficial for both academic as well as for business development. However, an individual's personal privacy is a big concern because of the trust issue across organizations. At the same time, the utility of the shared data that is required for its favorable use is also important. Studies show that plenty of conventional work is available where an individual has only one record in a dataset (1:1 dataset), which is not the case in many applications. In a more realistic form, an individual may have more than one record in a dataset (1:M). In this article, we highlight the high utility loss and inapplicability for the 1:M dataset of the
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.