ArticleScientific data2025
Comparison of Three Anonymization Tools for a Health Fitness Study.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [What are anonymized data? : Options for providing cancer registry data for research in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
- A case study comparing anonymized and synthetic health insurance claims data for medication safety assessments.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
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
One of many challenges to open science is anonymization of personal data so that it may be shared. This paper presents a case study of the anonymization of a dataset containing cardio-respiratory fitness and commuting patterns for Slovenian school children. It evaluates three different anonymization tools, ARX, SDV, and SynDiffix. The fitness study was selected because its small size (N=713) and generally low statistical significance make it particularly challenging for data anonymization. Unlike most prior anonymization tool evaluations, this paper examines whether the scientific conclusions of the original study would have been supported by the anonymized datasets. It also considers the burden imposed on researchers using the tools both for data generation and data analysis.
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.