↓ Skip to main content

Privacy-Preserving Linkage of Genomic and Clinical Data Sets

Overview of attention for article published in IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Privacy-Preserving Linkage of Genomic and Clinical Data Sets
Published in
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, July 2018
DOI 10.1109/tcbb.2018.2855125
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dixie B. Baker, Bartha M. Knoppers, Mark Phillips, David van Enckevort, Petra Kaufmann, Hanns Lochmuller, Domenica Taruscio

Abstract

The capacity to link records associated with the same individual across data sets is a key challenge for data-driven research. The challenge is exacerbated by the potential inclusion of both genomic and clinical data in data sets that may span multiple legal jurisdictions, and by the need to enable re-identification in limited circumstances. Privacy-Preserving Record Linkage (PPRL) methods address these challenges. In 2016, the Interdisciplinary Committee of the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium (IRDiRC) launched a task team to explore approaches to PPRL. The task team is a collaboration with the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) Regulatory and Ethics and Data Security Work Streams, and aims to prepare policy and technology standards to enable highly reliable linking of records associated with the same individual without disclosing their identity except under conditions in which the use of the data has led to information of importance to the individual's safety or health, and applicable law allows or requires the return of results. The PPRL Task Force has examined the ethico-legal requirements, constraints, and implications of PPRL, and has applied this knowledge to the exploration of technology methods and approaches to PPRL. This paper reports and justifies the findings and recommendations thus far.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 18%
Other 7 11%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 14 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 26 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
#493
of 1,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,767
of 340,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
#16
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,081 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.