Literature DB >> 32022691

Evaluation of Privacy Risks of Patients' Data in China: Case Study.

Mengchun Gong1, Shuang Wang2, Lezi Wang1, Chao Liu1, Jianyang Wang3, Qiang Guo4, Hao Zheng5, Kang Xie6, Chenghong Wang3, Zhouguang Hui3,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient privacy is a ubiquitous problem around the world. Many existing studies have demonstrated the potential privacy risks associated with sharing of biomedical data. Owing to the increasing need for data sharing and analysis, health care data privacy is drawing more attention. However, to better protect biomedical data privacy, it is essential to assess the privacy risk in the first place.
OBJECTIVE: In China, there is no clear regulation for health systems to deidentify data. It is also not known whether a mechanism such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) safe harbor policy will achieve sufficient protection. This study aimed to conduct a pilot study using patient data from Chinese hospitals to understand and quantify the privacy risks of Chinese patients.
METHODS: We used g-distinct analysis to evaluate the reidentification risks with regard to the HIPAA safe harbor approach when applied to Chinese patients' data. More specifically, we estimated the risks based on the HIPAA safe harbor and limited dataset policies by assuming an attacker has background knowledge of the patient from the public domain.
RESULTS: The experiments were conducted on 0.83 million patients (with data field of date of birth, gender, and surrogate ZIP codes generated based on home address) across 33 provincial-level administrative divisions in China. Under the Limited Dataset policy, 19.58% (163,262/833,235) of the population could be uniquely identifiable under the g-distinct metric (ie, 1-distinct). In contrast, the Safe Harbor policy is able to significantly reduce privacy risk, where only 0.072% (601/833,235) of individuals are uniquely identifiable, and the majority of the population is 3000 indistinguishable (ie the population is expected to share common attributes with 3000 or less people).
CONCLUSIONS: Through the experiments based on real-world patient data, this work illustrates that the results of g-distinct analysis about Chinese patient privacy risk are similar to those from a previous US study, in which data from different organizations/regions might be vulnerable to different reidentification risks under different policies. This work provides reference to Chinese health care entities for estimating patients' privacy risk during data sharing, which laid the foundation of privacy risk study about Chinese patients' data in the future. ©Mengchun Gong, Shuang Wang, Lezi Wang, Chao Liu, Jianyang Wang, Qiang Guo, Hao Zheng, Kang Xie, Chenghong Wang, Zhouguang Hui. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 05.02.2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chinese patients’ data; data sharing; patient privacy; privacy risk; re-identification

Year:  2020        PMID: 32022691      PMCID: PMC7055805          DOI: 10.2196/13046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Med Inform


  17 in total

1.  Medical registry governance and patient privacy.

Authors:  Owen D Williamson; Peter A Cameron; John J McNeil
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2004-08-02       Impact factor: 7.738

2.  Privacy-preserving biomedical data dissemination via a hybrid approach.

Authors:  Yichen Jiang; Chenghong Wang; Zhixuan Wu; Xin Du; Shuang Wang
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-12-05

3.  PRINCESS: Privacy-protecting Rare disease International Network Collaboration via Encryption through Software guard extensionS.

Authors:  Feng Chen; Shuang Wang; Xiaoqian Jiang; Sijie Ding; Yao Lu; Jihoon Kim; S Cenk Sahinalp; Chisato Shimizu; Jane C Burns; Victoria J Wright; Eileen Png; Martin L Hibberd; David D Lloyd; Hai Yang; Amalio Telenti; Cinnamon S Bloss; Dov Fox; Kristin Lauter; Lucila Ohno-Machado
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  SecureLR: Secure Logistic Regression Model via a Hybrid Cryptographic Protocol.

Authors:  Yichen Jiang; Jenny Hamer; Chenghong Wang; Xiaoqian Jiang; Miran Kim; Yongsoo Song; Yuhou Xia; Noman Mohammed; Md Nazmus Sadat; Shuang Wang
Journal:  IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 3.710

5.  Identifying personal genomes by surname inference.

Authors:  Melissa Gymrek; Amy L McGuire; David Golan; Eran Halperin; Yaniv Erlich
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 6.  Publishing data from electronic health records while preserving privacy: a survey of algorithms.

Authors:  Aris Gkoulalas-Divanis; Grigorios Loukides; Jimeng Sun
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 6.317

7.  Protecting patient privacy when sharing patient-level data from clinical trials.

Authors:  Katherine Tucker; Janice Branson; Maria Dilleen; Sally Hollis; Paul Loughlin; Mark J Nixon; Zoë Williams
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  PRESAGE: PRivacy-preserving gEnetic testing via SoftwAre Guard Extension.

Authors:  Feng Chen; Chenghong Wang; Wenrui Dai; Xiaoqian Jiang; Noman Mohammed; Md Momin Al Aziz; Md Nazmus Sadat; Cenk Sahinalp; Kristin Lauter; Shuang Wang
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 3.063

9.  iDASH secure genome analysis competition 2017.

Authors:  XiaoFeng Wang; Haixu Tang; Shuang Wang; Xiaoqian Jiang; Wenhao Wang; Diyue Bu; Lei Wang; Yicheng Jiang; Chenghong Wang
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 3.063

10.  The risk of re-identification versus the need to identify individuals in rare disease research.

Authors:  Mats G Hansson; Hanns Lochmüller; Olaf Riess; Franz Schaefer; Michael Orth; Yaffa Rubinstein; Caron Molster; Hugh Dawkins; Domenica Taruscio; Manuel Posada; Simon Woods
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 4.246

View more
  2 in total

1.  Challenges and recommendations for high quality research using electronic health records.

Authors:  K Honeyford; P Expert; E E Mendelsohn; B Post; A A Faisal; B Glampson; E K Mayer; C E Costelloe
Journal:  Front Digit Health       Date:  2022-08-19

2.  Cloud-Based System for Effective Surveillance and Control of COVID-19: Useful Experiences From Hubei, China.

Authors:  Mengchun Gong; Li Liu; Xin Sun; Yue Yang; Shuang Wang; Hong Zhu
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 5.428

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.