Using Secure Multi-Party Computation to Create Clinical Trial Cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing volume of digital medical data offers substantial research opportunities, though its complete utilization is hindered by ongoing privacy and security obstacles. This proof-of-concept study explores and confirms the viability of using Secure Multi-Party Computation (SMPC) to ensure protection and integrity of sensitive patient data, allowing the construction of clinical trial cohorts. Our findings reveal that SMPC facilitates collaborative data analysis on distributed, private datasets with negligible computational costs and optimized data partition sizes. The established architecture incorporates patient information via a blockchain-based decentralized healthcare platform and employs the MPyC library in Python for secure computations on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)-format data. The outcomes affirm SMPC’s capacity to maintain patient privacy during cohort formation, with minimal overhead. It illustrates the potential of SMPC-based methodologies to expand access to medical research data. A key contribution of this work is eliminating the need for complex cryptographic key management while maintaining patient privacy, illustrating the potential of SMPC-based methodologies to expand access to medical research data by reducing implementation barriers.
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 | 0.012 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".