Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40790276›Full record

ArticleNature biomedical engineering2026

Unconditional latent diffusion models memorize patient imaging data.

Salman Ul Hassan Dar, Marvin Seyfarth, Isabelle Ayx, Theano Papavassiliu, Stefan O Schoenberg, Robert Malte Siepmann, Fabian Christopher Laqua, Jannik Kahmann, Norbert Frey, Bettina Baeßler and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature biomedical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 2025 in review.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

14 authors.

Salman Ul Hassan DarDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. SalmanUlHassan.Dar@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7603-4245
Marvin SeyfarthDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Isabelle AyxDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3507-9006
Theano PapavassiliuAI Health Innovation Cluster (AIH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Stefan O SchoenbergAI Health Innovation Cluster (AIH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Robert Malte SiepmannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Fabian Christopher LaquaInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Jannik KahmannDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Norbert FreyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Bettina BaeßlerInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3244-3864
Sebastian FoerschInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4740-6900
Daniel TruhnDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9605-0728
Jakob Nikolas KatherElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3730-5348
Sandy EngelhardtDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence models facilitate open-data sharing by proposing synthetic data as surrogates of real patient data. Despite the promise for healthcare, some of these models are susceptible to patient data memorization, where models generate patient data copies instead of novel synthetic samples, resulting in patient re-identification. Here we assess memorization in unconditional latent diffusion models by training them on a variety of datasets for synthetic data generation and detecting memorization with a self-supervised copy detection approach. We show a high degree of patient data memorization across all datasets, with approximately 37.2% of patient data detected as memorized and 68.7% of synthetic samples identified as patient data copies. Latent diffusion models are more susceptible to memorization than autoencoders and generative adversarial networks, and they outperform non-diffusion models in synthesis quality. Augmentation strategies during training, small architecture size and increasing datasets can reduce memorization, while overtraining the models can enhance it. These results emphasize the importance of carefully training generative models on private medical imaging datasets and examining the synthetic data to ensure patient privacy.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceImage Processing, Computer-AssistedAlgorithmsDatabases, FactualHumansInformation DisseminationNeural Networks, Computer

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.