Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40547343›Full record

ArticleEthics and information technology2025

A critique of current approaches to privacy in machine learning.

Florian van Daalen, Marine Jacquemin, Johan van Soest, Nina Stahl, David Townend, Andre Dekker, Inigo Bermejo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ethics and information technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Florian van DaalenRadiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Marine JacqueminRadiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Johan van SoestRadiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Nina StahlDepartment of Health, Ethics and Society (HES), Faculty of Health, University Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands.
David TownendCity Law School, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Andre DekkerRadiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Inigo BermejoRadiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Access to large datasets, the rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the ease of collecting personal data, have led to significant breakthroughs in machine learning. However, they have also raised new concerns about privacy data protection. Controversies like the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal highlight unethical practices in today's digital landscape. Historical privacy incidents have led to the development of technical and legal solutions to protect data subjects' right to privacy. However, within machine learning, these problems have largely been approached from a mathematical point of view, ignoring the larger context in which privacy is relevant. This technical approach has benefited data-controllers and failed to protect individuals adequately. Moreover, it has aligned with Big Tech organizations' interests and allowed them to further push the discussion in a direction that is favorable to their interests. This paper reflects on current privacy approaches in machine learning and explores how various big organizations guide the public discourse, and how this harms data subjects. It also critiques the current data protection regulations, as they allow superficial compliance without addressing deeper ethical issues. Finally, it argues that redefining privacy to focus on harm to data subjects rather than on data breaches would benefit data subjects as well as society at large.

Indexed as

EthicsMachine learningPrivacyPrivacy preserving

Identifiers

PMID40547343
PMCPMC12181200

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.