ArticleScientific data2026
From theory to practice: Re-identification Challenge to test imaging data pseudonymization effectiveness.
Article in Scientific data, 2026. 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.
- Bridging the AI chasm in oncology: a standardized platform to enable the in silico clinical validation of AI models within the CHAIMELEON Project.European radiology experimental · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DICOM image pseudonymization is an effective measure to protect patient privacy and ensure compliance with the GDPR. However, no standardized methods guarantee the irreversible anonymization of DICOM images or provide evidence on the robustness of these procedures. Organizations such as NEMA propose pseudonymization profiles for DICOM metadata, but the risk to data protection is assumed by the entity responsible for pseudonymization, as the potential privacy risks associated with their use cannot be accurately assessed. In the Re-identification Challenge, the selected 68 participants were tasked with re-identifying 38 pseudonymized DICOM studies from multiple European acquisition sites, modalities and anatomical regions. The data were pseudonymized using the pseudonymization profiles developed in ChAImeleon
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.