DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Recommended article: Is Deidentification Sufficient to Protect Health Privacy in Research?

Posted on September 27, 2010 by Dissent

Mark A. Rothstein of the University of Louisville Institute for Bioethics, Health Policy, and Law has an article in The American Journal of Bioethics (Volume 10 Issue 9 2010), “Is Deidentification Sufficient to Protect Health Privacy in Research?” Here’s the abstract:

The revolution in health information technology has enabled the compilation and use of large data sets of health records for genomic and other research. Extensive collections of health records, especially those linked with biological specimens, are also extremely valuable for outcomes research, quality assurance, public health surveillance, and other beneficial purposes. The manipulation of large quantities of health information, however, creates substantial challenges for protecting the privacy of patients and research subjects. The strategy of choice for many health care providers and research institutions in dealing with this challenge has been to de-identify individual health information.

As regular readers of PHIprivacy.net know, I have been hammering at privacy issues raised by databases of health care information – including databases that are supposedly “deidentified.” Here’s part of what Dr. Rothstein writes about re-identification of deidentified data:

Despite using various measures to deidentify health records, it is possible to reidentify them in a surprisingly large number of cases by using computerized network databases containing voter registration records, hospital discharge records, commercially available databases, and other sources (Malin and Sweeney 2004; Sweeney 2002). Indeed, it is likely that between 63% (Golle 2006) and 87% (Sweeney 2000) of the population of the United States could be uniquely identified by using only gender, ZIP code, and date of birth. The cost of doing so, however, would vary by state, because of the different prices charged for voter registration data (Benitez and Malin 2010).

Reidentification of genomic samples in biobanks is also possible using publicly available databases, thereby raising the question of whether genetic information can ever be considered deidentified in the sense that it cannot be linked with other genetic samples (McGuire andGibbs 2006).After a scientific paper demonstrated it was theoretically possible to identify an individual’s genomic attribute data in a pooled or aggregated sample (Homer et al. 2008), the National Human Genome Research Institute immediately restricted public access to pooled genomic data.

You can download the free full-text article from SSRN.

Additional articles on privacy and de-identification can be found in the September issue of The American Journal of Bioethics.

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Ie: Computer Containing Patient Data Stolen From Ennis Hospital
Lessons From A Security Breach →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Banks Want SEC to Rescind Cyberattack Disclosure Requirements
  • MathWorks, Creator of MATLAB, Confirms Ransomware Attack
  • Russian hospital programmer gets 14 years for leaking soldier data to Ukraine
  • MSCS board renews contract with PowerSchool while suing them
  • Iranian Man Pleaded Guilty to Role in Robbinhood Ransomware
  • Developments surrounding data breach at Dutch police
  • Estonia launches international search for Moroccan citizen wanted over data theft
  • Now it’s Tiffany: Another LVMH luxury brand hit by hackers
  • Dutch Government: More forms of espionage to be a criminal offence from 15 May onwards
  • B.C. health authority faces class-action lawsuit over 2009 data breach (1)

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • The CCPA emerges as a new legal battleground for web tracking litigation
  • U.S. Spy Agencies Are Getting a One-Stop Shop to Buy Your Most Sensitive Personal Data
  • Period Tracking App Users Win Class Status in Google, Meta Suit
  • AI: the Italian Supervisory Authority fines Luka, the U.S. company behind chatbot “Replika,” 5 Million €
  • D.C. Federal Court Rules Termination of Democrat PCLOB Members Is Unlawful
  • Meta may continue to train AI with user data, German court says
  • Widow of slain Saudi journalist can’t pursue surveillance claims against Israeli spyware firm

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.