Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41256253›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of population data science2025

A review of synthetic data terminology for privacy preserving use cases.

Lora Frayling, Shah Suraj Bharat, Elizabeth Pattinson, Joshua Stock, Fiona Lugg-Widger, Emma Gordon, Emily Oliver

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of population data science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Lora FraylingHealth Data Insight CIC, CPC4, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, CB21 5XE, United Kingdom.
Shah Suraj BharatAdministrative Data Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Polaris House, North Star Avenue, Swindon SN2 1UJ, United Kingdom.
Elizabeth PattinsonAdministrative Data Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Polaris House, North Star Avenue, Swindon SN2 1UJ, United Kingdom.
Joshua StockCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, 7th Floor, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS.
Fiona Lugg-WidgerCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, 7th Floor, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS.
Emma GordonAdministrative Data Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Polaris House, North Star Avenue, Swindon SN2 1UJ, United Kingdom.
Emily OliverAdministrative Data Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Polaris House, North Star Avenue, Swindon SN2 1UJ, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic data is emerging as a key area of development for supporting research that involves secure forms of administrative and health data, both in the United Kingdom and globally. In practice, key challenges in the generation and adoption of synthetic data are closely tied to the need for agreed and consistent terminology for describing it. The absence of standardised language hinders the setting of quality standards, establishment of governance and guidelines and effective sharing of knowledge and best practices. This has implications for research that uses synthetic healthcare and administrative data, particularly when such data are generated from protected personal data. This commentary paper reviews existing literature on synthetic data to explore how key terms are currently defined in practice, with a focus on privacy-preserving use cases. Our analysis reveals that terms describing properties of synthetic data are often lacking and inconsistent, largely due to the breadth of synthetic data types, contexts and use cases. Context-specific terminology with nuanced meanings complicates efforts for the development of universally agreed definitions, particularly for privacy-preserving synthetic data that captures characteristics from protected data sources. To address this, we propose broad definitions for key terms including

Indexed as

Computer SecurityConfidentialityPrivacyTerminology as TopicHumansUnited Kingdomadministrative datadata confidentialitydata utilityhealth dataprivacy preservationstatistical disclosure controlsynthetic data

Identifiers

PMID41256253
PMCPMC12622363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.