ArticleInternational journal of population data science2023
Adapting historical clinical genetic test records for anonymised data linkage: obstacles and opportunities.
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. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cystic fibrosis (CF) heterozygotes (also known as 'carriers') are people who have one mutated copy of the Methods: Following governance approvals, we adapted 30 years worth of CF genetic testing records generated by the All-Wales Medical Genomics Service (AWMGS) and submitted them to the SAIL Databank for anonymised linkage. Results: Unexpected obstacles meant that a minimum amount of clinical information could be annotated ahead of linkage. The raw data were highly heterogeneous due to the records' longitudinal collection and clinical origins, making standardisation difficult. Moreover, the presence of unique identifiers in the clinical data violated the separation principle, requiring manual annotation to produce a cleaned dataset. Explicit identification of patients or their relatives throughout the records complicated split file anonymisation. Conclusion: Extracting useful information from historical clinical genetic test records is a significant challenge with technical and governance aspects. The mixing of unique identifiers with clinical data in heterogeneous, unstructured free text combined with a lack of automated tools meant that manual annotation was required to adhere to the separation principle. As such, only a minimum of the available clinical data was annotatable within the project timeline and mutually exclusive access to the identifiable and pseudonymised data meant that annotations could not later be validated. Future efforts to link clinical genetic test records for research must consider these challenges in their approach.
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.