ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025
Robust privacy amidst innovation with large language models through a critical assessment of the risks.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Scoping Review of Synthetic Data Generation by Language Models in Biomedical Research and Application: Data Utility and Quality Perspectives.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2026Review
- AI Privacy and Security in Healthcare: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of telerehabilitation · 2026Article
- 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 · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates the integration of electronic health records (EHRs) and natural language processing (NLP) with large language models (LLMs) to enhance healthcare data management and patient care, focusing on using advanced language models to create secure, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant synthetic patient notes for global biomedical research. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study used de-identified and re-identified versions of the MIMIC III dataset with GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Mistral 7B to generate synthetic clinical notes. Text generation employed templates and keyword extraction for contextually relevant notes, with One-shot generation for comparison. Privacy was assessed by analyzing protected health information (PHI) occurrence and co-occurrence, while utility was evaluated by training an ICD-9 coder using synthetic notes. Text quality was measured using ROUGE (Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation) and cosine similarity metrics to compare synthetic notes with source notes for semantic similarity.
resultsThe analysis of PHI occurrence and text utility via the ICD-9 coding task showed that the keyword-based method had low risk and good performance. One-shot generation exhibited the highest PHI exposure and PHI co-occurrence, particularly in geographic location and date categories. The Normalized One-shot method achieved the highest classification accuracy. Re-identified data consistently outperformed de-identified data. DISCUSSION: Privacy analysis revealed a critical balance between data utility and privacy protection, influencing future data use and sharing.
conclusionThis study shows that keyword-based methods can create synthetic clinical notes that protect privacy while retaining data usability, potentially improving clinical data sharing. The use of dummy PHIs to counter privacy attacks may offer better utility and privacy than traditional de-identification.
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.