Sharing Aggregated Patient Counts in Place of Line-Level EHR Data: Analytic Fidelity and the Limits of Count Suppression for Privacy

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective

Privacy regulation constrains sharing line-level electronic health records (EHR) across institutions. One alternative is to aggregate counts into a cube, a table of counts for every combination of categorical variables, with cells below a threshold suppressed. This study asked whether common analyses on the cube reproduce conclusions from line-level data, and whether suppression prevents recovery of the small cells it is meant to hide.

Materials and Methods

A Bayesian count-inference pipeline was built that reconstructs suppressed counts and doubles as a reconstruction attack. Applied to 285 pediatric kidney-transplant patients at Boston Children’s Hospital, statistical fidelity (Jensen-Shannon divergence, Cramér’s V, and R²) and analytical utility (marginal distributions, subgroup graft rejection odds ratios, and logistic-regression classification) were evaluated. Conditional Tabular GAN (CTGAN) synthetic data served as a comparator.

Results

Statistical analyses on the cube recapitulated results from line-level data. Across 106 demographic-by-medication subgroups, a bootstrap mean of 3.5 subgroups showed a significant graft-rejection association. The cube’s odds-ratio sign changes reversed no significant associations, versus 2.3 for CTGAN. The same reconstruction also defeated suppression: in a 10-variable cube, 76.6% of suppressed cube cells were recovered exactly (14,554 of 18,994), including 85.5% of single-patient cells.

Discussion

The cube reproduced common kidney-transplant analyses, but the same reconstruction also recovered suppressed cells; fidelity and privacy risk are thus two faces of one reconstruction rather than independent properties.

Conclusions

The cube is a useful surrogate for these kidney-transplant analyses only when paired with a stronger privacy mechanism. This study demonstrated reconstructability of suppressed counts, not re-identification.

Article activity feed