ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2026
[What are anonymized data? : Options for providing cancer registry data for research in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation].
Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Every day, large amounts of patient-related data are collected in the healthcare system. The prerequisite for using such data for research purposes is usually that the consent of the persons concerned has been obtained or that the data are provided in anonymized form. Both researchers and data holders are often uncertain about what anonymization means and how it can be achieved. Is it sufficient to remove directly identifying information such as name and address? If not, what additional information that could enable identification must be considered? And can a dataset only be considered anonymized if it can be made available to the general public without risk?This article highlights the tension between the needs of research and the data protection interests of the individuals concerned, using the example of cancer registry data. Based on the definition of personal data in Art. 4 No. 1 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and current case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), it is argued that anonymity is not a property solely inherent to the data. Rather, it depends on the specific risk of re-identification, which is also influenced by the context in which the data are to be provided. The article highlights ways in which the probability of re-identifying a data subject can be minimized, both through data pre-processing and through legal and contractual restrictions on data use. If the remaining risk is judged to be-in the words of the ECJ-"de facto negligible," the pre-requisites for providing data in anonymized form have been met.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42776168What 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.