MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157854514 · doi:10.1038/s41431-021-00893-y

International transfers of personal data for health research following Schrems II: a problem in need of a solution

2021· article· en· W3157854514 on OpenAlexaff
Dara Hallinan, Alexander Bernier, Anne Cambon‐Thomsen, Francis P. Crawley, Диана Димитрова, Cláudia Bauzer Medeiros, Gustav Nilsonne, Simon Parker, Brian Pickering, Stéphanie Rennes

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Human Genetics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRural Development Administration
KeywordsContext (archaeology)European unionData sharingEconomic JusticeData Protection Act 1998Public relationsPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessInternet privacyMedicineLawComputer scienceInternational tradeBiologyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 16 July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued their decision in the Schrems II case concerning Facebook's transfers of personal data from the EU to the US. The decision may have significant effects on the legitimate transfer of personal data for health research purposes from the EU. This article aims: (i) to outline the consequences of the Schrems II decision for the sharing of personal data for health research between the EU and third countries, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; and, (ii) to consider certain options available to address the consequences of the decision and to facilitate international data exchange for health research moving forward.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.155
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.155
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.019
Scholarly communication0.0140.015
Open science0.0030.014
Research integrity0.0320.040
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.737
GPT teacher head0.614
Teacher spread0.123 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Human GeneticsSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207