Mapping Health Data: Improved Privacy Protection With Donut Method Geomasking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major challenge in mapping health data is protecting patient privacy while maintaining the spatial resolution necessary for spatial surveillance and outbreak identification. A new adaptive geomasking technique, referred to as the donut method, extends current methods of random displacement by ensuring a user-defined minimum level of geoprivacy. In donut method geomasking, each geocoded address is relocated in a random direction by at least a minimum distance, but less than a maximum distance. The authors compared the donut method with current methods of random perturbation and aggregation regarding measures of privacy protection and cluster detection performance by masking multiple disease field simulations under a range of parameters. Both the donut method and random perturbation performed better than aggregation in cluster detection measures. The performance of the donut method in geoprivacy measures was at least 42.7% higher and in cluster detection measures was less than 4.8% lower than that of random perturbation. Results show that the donut method provides a consistently higher level of privacy protection with a minimal decrease in cluster detection performance, especially in areas where the risk to individual geoprivacy is greatest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".