Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40244890›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

Ensuring General Data Protection Regulation Compliance and Security in a Clinical Data Warehouse From a University Hospital: Implementation Study.

Christine Riou, Mohamed El Azzouzi, Anne Hespel, Emeric Guillou, Gouenou Coatrieux, Marc Cuggia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Legal Frameworks for AI-driven Diagnostics and Robotic Surgery.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Christine RiouUniversity Hospital of Rennes, 2 rue Henri Le Guilloux, Rennes, 35000, France, 33 0299284215.ORCID 0000-0002-3046-9059
Mohamed El AzzouziDOMASIA, LTSI, UMR INSERM, University of Rennes, Rennes, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2473-6261
Anne HespelUniversity Hospital of Rennes, 2 rue Henri Le Guilloux, Rennes, 35000, France, 33 0299284215.ORCID 0000-0001-5361-1102
Emeric GuillouUniversity Hospital of Rennes, 2 rue Henri Le Guilloux, Rennes, 35000, France, 33 0299284215.ORCID 0009-0006-3940-3714
Gouenou CoatrieuxIMT Atlantique Bretagne Pays de Loire, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5643-0224
Marc CuggiaDOMASIA, LTSI, UMR INSERM, University of Rennes, Rennes, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6943-3937

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has profoundly influenced health data management, with significant implications for clinical data warehouses (CDWs). In 2021, France pioneered a national framework for GDPR-compliant CDW implementation, established by its data protection authority (Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés). This framework provides detailed guidelines for health care institutions, offering a unique opportunity to assess practical GDPR implementation in health data management. Objective: This study evaluates the real-world applicability of France's CDW framework through its implementation at a major university hospital. It identifies practical challenges for its implementation by health institutions and proposes adaptations relevant to regulatory authorities in order to facilitate research in secondary use data domains. Methods: A systematic assessment was conducted in May 2023 at the University Hospital of Rennes, which manages data for over 2 million patients through the eHOP CDW system. The evaluation examined 116 criteria across 13 categories using a dual-assessment approach validated by information security and data protection officers. Compliance was rated as met, unmet, or not applicable, with criteria classified as software-related (n=25) or institution-related (n=91). Results: Software-related criteria showed 60% (n=15) compliance, with 28% (n=7) noncompliant or partially compliant and 12% (n=3) not applicable. Institution-related criteria achieved 72% (n=28) compliance for security requirements. Key challenges included managing genetic data, implementing automated archiving, and controlling data exports. The findings revealed effective privacy protection measures but also highlighted areas requiring regulatory adjustments to better support research. Conclusions: This first empirical assessment of a national CDW compliance framework offers valuable insights for health care institutions implementing GDPR requirements. While the framework establishes robust privacy protections, certain provisions may overly constrain research activities. The study identifies opportunities for framework evolution, balancing data protection with research imperatives.

Indexed as

Computer SecurityConfidentialityData WarehousingElectronic Health RecordsGuideline AdherenceHospitals, UniversityFranceHumansapplicabilityclinical data warehousecompliancedata hubexperiential analysisFranceFrenchlegislationoperational challengepersonal datapersonal data protectionprivacysecurityuniversity hospitals

Identifiers

PMID40244890
PMCPMC12020775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.