Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38414537›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of population data science2023

De-identification of free text data containing personal health information: a scoping review of reviews.

Bekelu Negash, Alan Katz, Christine J Neilson, Moniruzzaman Moni, Marcello Nesca, Alexander Singer, Jennifer E Enns

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of population data science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Not Fully Synthetic: LLM-based Hybrid Approaches Towards Privacy-Preserving Clinical Note Sharing.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
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

7 authors.

Bekelu NegashManitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.
Alan KatzManitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.
Christine J NeilsonNeil John Maclean Health Sciences Library, University of Manitoba.
Moniruzzaman MoniGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation, Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.
Marcello NescaManitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.
Alexander SingerDepartment of Family Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.
Jennifer E EnnsManitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Using data in research often requires that the data first be de-identified, particularly in the case of health data, which often include Personal Identifiable Information (PII) and/or Personal Health Identifying Information (PHII). There are established procedures for de-identifying structured data, but de-identifying clinical notes, electronic health records, and other records that include free text data is more complex. Several different ways to achieve this are documented in the literature. This scoping review identifies categories of de-identification methods that can be used for free text data. Methods: We adopted an established scoping review methodology to examine review articles published up to May 9, 2022, in Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Scopus; the ACM Digital Library; IEEE Explore; and Compendex. Our research question was: What methods are used to de-identify free text data? Two independent reviewers conducted title and abstract screening and full-text article screening using the online review management tool Covidence. Results: The initial literature search retrieved 3,312 articles, most of which focused primarily on structured data. Eighteen publications describing methods of de-identification of free text data met the inclusion criteria for our review. The majority of the included articles focused on removing categories of personal health information identified by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The de-identification methods they described combined rule-based methods or machine learning with other strategies such as deep learning. Conclusion: Our review identifies and categorises de-identification methods for free text data as rule-based methods, machine learning, deep learning and a combination of these and other approaches. Most of the articles we found in our search refer to de-identification methods that target some or all categories of PHII. Our review also highlights how de-identification systems for free text data have evolved over time and points to hybrid approaches as the most promising approach for the future.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityHealth Records, PersonalData AnonymizationElectronic Health RecordsHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability ActReview Literature as TopicUnited Statesde-identificationelectronic medical recordsHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability Actmachine learningpersonal health information

Identifiers

PMID38414537
PMCPMC10898315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.