ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Medical data sharing and synthetic clinical data generation - maximizing biomedical resource utilization and minimizing participant re-identification risks.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The sensitive nature of electronic health records (EHR) and wearable data presents challenges in sharing biomedical resources while minimizing re-identification risks. This article introduces an end-to-end, titratable pipeline that generates privacy-preserving "digital twin" datasets from complex EHR and wearable-device records (Apple Watch data from 3029 participants) using DataSifter and Synthetic Data Vault (SDV) methods. Various obfuscation levels were applied (DataSifter: small, medium, large; SDV: CTGAN, Gaussian Copula) and benchmarked using utility (statistical fidelity, machine learning performance) and privacy (re-identification risk, detection likelihood) metrics. The highest-obfuscation DataSifter twin delivered the strongest privacy protection (0.83) while preserving key statistical and predictive signals (83.1% confidence interval overlap in regression models), outperforming SDV, particularly for longitudinal data. Despite declining performance in machine learning tasks with higher obfuscation, utility was generally preserved. The study underscores the importance of digital twin datasets and highlights DataSifter's adaptability in privacy-utility trade-offs, advocating its utility for secure data sharing.
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.