Aryelly Rodriguez1, Christopher Tuck2, Marshall F Dozier3, Stephanie C Lewis1, Sandra Eldridge4, Tracy Jackson5, Alastair Murray6, Christopher J Weir1. 1. Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 2. Centre for Cardiovascular Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 3. Library & University Collections, Information Services, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 4. Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 5. Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 6. Independent Researcher, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: There are increasing pressures for anonymised datasets from clinical trials to be shared across the scientific community, and differing recommendations exist on how to perform anonymisation prior to sharing. We aimed to systematically identify, describe and synthesise existing recommendations for anonymising clinical trial datasets to prepare for data sharing. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE®, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to 8 February 2021. We also searched other resources to ensure the comprehensiveness of our search. Any publication reporting recommendations on anonymisation to enable data sharing from clinical trials was included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full text for eligibility. One reviewer extracted data from included papers using thematic synthesis, which then was sense-checked by a second reviewer. Results were summarised by narrative analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine articles (from 43 studies) were eligible for inclusion. Three distinct themes are emerging: anonymisation, de-identification and pseudonymisation. The most commonly used anonymisation techniques are: removal of direct patient identifiers; and careful evaluation and modification of indirect identifiers to minimise the risk of identification. Anonymised datasets joined with controlled access was the preferred method for data sharing. CONCLUSIONS: There is no single standardised set of recommendations on how to anonymise clinical trial datasets for sharing. However, this systematic review shows a developing consensus on techniques used to achieve anonymisation. Researchers in clinical trials still consider that anonymisation techniques by themselves are insufficient to protect patient privacy, and they need to be paired with controlled access.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: There are increasing pressures for anonymised datasets from clinical trials to be shared across the scientific community, and differing recommendations exist on how to perform anonymisation prior to sharing. We aimed to systematically identify, describe and synthesise existing recommendations for anonymising clinical trial datasets to prepare for data sharing. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE®, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to 8 February 2021. We also searched other resources to ensure the comprehensiveness of our search. Any publication reporting recommendations on anonymisation to enable data sharing from clinical trials was included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full text for eligibility. One reviewer extracted data from included papers using thematic synthesis, which then was sense-checked by a second reviewer. Results were summarised by narrative analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine articles (from 43 studies) were eligible for inclusion. Three distinct themes are emerging: anonymisation, de-identification and pseudonymisation. The most commonly used anonymisation techniques are: removal of direct patient identifiers; and careful evaluation and modification of indirect identifiers to minimise the risk of identification. Anonymised datasets joined with controlled access was the preferred method for data sharing. CONCLUSIONS: There is no single standardised set of recommendations on how to anonymise clinical trial datasets for sharing. However, this systematic review shows a developing consensus on techniques used to achieve anonymisation. Researchers in clinical trials still consider that anonymisation techniques by themselves are insufficient to protect patient privacy, and they need to be paired with controlled access.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical trials; data anonymisation; data curation; datasets; guidelines; patient identification systems; personally identifiable information; systematic review
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
Authors: Catrin Tudur Smith; Sarah Nevitt; Duncan Appelbe; Richard Appleton; Pete Dixon; Janet Harrison; Anthony Marson; Paula Williamson; Elizabeth Tremain Journal: Trials Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: I Roberts; H Shakur; T Coats; B Hunt; E Balogun; L Barnetson; L Cook; T Kawahara; P Perel; D Prieto-Merino; M Ramos; J Cairns; C Guerriero Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Christian Ohmann; Rita Banzi; Steve Canham; Serena Battaglia; Mihaela Matei; Christopher Ariyo; Lauren Becnel; Barbara Bierer; Sarion Bowers; Luca Clivio; Monica Dias; Christiane Druml; Hélène Faure; Martin Fenner; Jose Galvez; Davina Ghersi; Christian Gluud; Trish Groves; Paul Houston; Ghassan Karam; Dipak Kalra; Rachel L Knowles; Karmela Krleža-Jerić; Christine Kubiak; Wolfgang Kuchinke; Rebecca Kush; Ari Lukkarinen; Pedro Silverio Marques; Andrew Newbigging; Jennifer O'Callaghan; Philippe Ravaud; Irene Schlünder; Daniel Shanahan; Helmut Sitter; Dylan Spalding; Catrin Tudur-Smith; Peter van Reusel; Evert-Ben van Veen; Gerben Rienk Visser; Julia Wilson; Jacques Demotes-Mainard Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 2.692