ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025
Should we synthesize more than we need: impact of synthetic data generation for high-dimensional cross-sectional medical data.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 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.
- Evaluating the quality of tabular synthetic data in health care.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Embracing the Digital Revolution: How Artificial Intelligence is Transforming Clinical Trials in Older Participants.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIn medical research and education, generative artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) models to synthesize artificial medical data can enable the sharing of high-quality data while preserving the privacy of patients. Given that such data is often high-dimensional, a relevant consideration is whether to synthesize the entire dataset when only a task-relevant subset is needed. This study evaluates how the number of variables in training impacts fidelity, utility, and privacy of the synthetic data (SD). MATERIAL AND
methodsWe used 12 cross-sectional medical datasets, defined a downstream task with corresponding core variables, and derived 6354 variants by adding adjunct variables to the core. SD was generated using 7 different generative models and evaluated for fidelity, downstream utility, and privacy. Mixed-effect models were used to assess the effect of adjunct variables on the respective evaluation metric, accounting for the medical dataset as a random component.
resultsFidelity was unaffected by the number of adjunct variables in 5/7 SDG models. Similarly, downstream utility remained stable in 6/7 (predictive task) and 5/7 (inferential task) SDG models. Where significant effects were observed, they were minimal, resulting, for example, in a 0.05 decrease in Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUROC) when adding 120 variables. Privacy was not impacted by the number of adjunct variables. DISCUSSION: Our findings show that fidelity, utility, and privacy are preserved when generating a more comprehensive medical dataset than the task-relevant subset.
conclusionOur findings support a cost-effective, utility, and privacy-preserving way of implementing SDG into medical research and education.
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.