- Joined
- Jun 17, 2014
- Messages
- 63,099
- Reaction score
- 154,727
From Reuters Health News: Anonymous patient data may not be as private as previously thought | Reuters
The study: Feasibility of Reidentifying Individuals by Their Protected Health Information
Key conclusion listed in the study: The findings of this study suggest that current practices for deidentifying physical activity data are insufficient for privacy and that deidentification should aggregate the physical activity data of many people to ensure individuals’ privacy.
The news article mentions the following:
“Dr. Elliott Haut worries that studies like this one will spark fears in the public, which might call for cessation of research using de-identified data.... While Haut acknowledges the risk that patient data could be relinked to patient identities, the benefits of research with this kind of data far outweigh those risks and can change medical practices for the better, he said.”
“For example, he said, as a trauma surgeon, he wondered if the common practice of spine immobilization - putting a neck collar on and buckling a patient to a back board - is helpful or harmful for gunshot victims. The goal is to prevent movement and thus possibly paralysis.
“We looked at the data and not only is this not beneficial, but it also could be harmful because the first responder takes five to 10 minutes doing this procedure instead of going directly to the hospital where we can start fixing them,” Haut said. “If you are critically injured, that five minutes makes a huge difference.””
The study: Feasibility of Reidentifying Individuals by Their Protected Health Information
Key conclusion listed in the study: The findings of this study suggest that current practices for deidentifying physical activity data are insufficient for privacy and that deidentification should aggregate the physical activity data of many people to ensure individuals’ privacy.
The news article mentions the following:
“Dr. Elliott Haut worries that studies like this one will spark fears in the public, which might call for cessation of research using de-identified data.... While Haut acknowledges the risk that patient data could be relinked to patient identities, the benefits of research with this kind of data far outweigh those risks and can change medical practices for the better, he said.”
“For example, he said, as a trauma surgeon, he wondered if the common practice of spine immobilization - putting a neck collar on and buckling a patient to a back board - is helpful or harmful for gunshot victims. The goal is to prevent movement and thus possibly paralysis.
“We looked at the data and not only is this not beneficial, but it also could be harmful because the first responder takes five to 10 minutes doing this procedure instead of going directly to the hospital where we can start fixing them,” Haut said. “If you are critically injured, that five minutes makes a huge difference.””
