MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416794473 · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-02112-0

Protecting patient privacy in tabular synthetic health data: a regulatory perspective

2025· article· en· W4416794473 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa Pilgram, Haksoo Ko, Khaled El Emam

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Digital Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Vulnerability (computing)Information privacyHealth careData Protection Act 1998Health dataConfidentialityPrivacy by Design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic tabular data generation (SDG) is increasingly important in healthcare research and innovation while preserving patients' privacy. However, ethical concerns remain, primarily over residual privacy vulnerability and insufficient oversight. This review analyzes the only published SDG regulatory guidelines to date, from United Kingdom, Singapore, and South Korea. All emphasize privacy, acknowledging synthetic data is not inherently free from disclosure risks. Thresholds for sufficiently low risk are yet to be determined.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.342
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Digital MedicineSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207