Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – De-Identification versus Pseudo-Anonymisation
De-identification and pseudo-anonymization are two commonly used techniques for protecting personal information in real world evidence (RWE) studies.
De-identification involves removing or obscuring any personal identifiers, such as names, addresses, and social security numbers, from a dataset. The goal is to make it impossible to identify individuals in the dataset. However, de-identified data can still potentially be re-identified if combined with other data sources or through statistical analysis.
Pseudo-anonymization involves replacing personal identifiers with a unique identifier, or code, that cannot be traced back to the individual without access to a separate database. This technique provides an additional layer of protection as the original personal identifiers are not included in the dataset. However, there is still a risk that individuals can be re-identified if the codes are compromised or if the separate database is breached.
In the context of RWE, both de-identification and pseudo-anonymization can be effective in protecting personal information. The choice of technique will depend on the level of risk associated with re-identification and the specific requirements of the study. For example, if the dataset contains sensitive information or the risk of re-identification is high, pseudo-anonymization may be preferred. If the risk of re-identification is low and the dataset does not contain sensitive information, de-identification may be sufficient.
It is important to note that neither de-identification nor pseudo-anonymization can guarantee complete protection of personal information. Additional measures, such as access controls and data use agreements, may be necessary to further reduce the risk of re-identification and protect the privacy of individuals in RWE studies.
Share this story...
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – ICH GCP (R3) – Real World Evidence Context
RWE 101 - ICH GCP (R3) - Real World Evidence Context Revision 2 of ICH GCP caused confusion to those of us who work with non-interventional studies. The glossary [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Non-Interventional Studies vs Market Health Research
RWE 101 - Non-Interventional Studies vs Market Health Research Key differences between a non-interventional study (NIS) and market health research include:1. Research Objective: NIS are conducted to examine real-world [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Audits vs Inspections
RWE 101 - Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 - Audits vs Inspections In the context of regulatory compliance for Real-World Evidence (RWE), both audits and inspections play crucial roles, [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – A Career of Many Pathways
RWE 101 - A Career of Many Pathways Real-world evidence (RWE) refers to the information on health care that is derived from analysis of real-world data (RWD). RWE [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Evolution of Regulatory Affairs
RWE 101 - Evolution of Regulatory Affairs Real-world evidence (RWE) and real-world data (RWD) are increasingly influencing regulatory affairs in the biopharmaceutical and healthcare industry. This change has been [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Project Managers
RWE 101 - Project Managers Real-World Evidence (RWE) observational studies and clinical trials are both key elements of medical research, but they involve very different methodologies, aims, and requirements. [...]