Workshop | Topics:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
Other |
References |
Mailing list |
Welcome
Topic 5. Are re-identified results now confidential?
|
Once re-identified, can researchers post re-identifications publicly online? Can subsequent research use the re-identified results? Does public data plus public data yield private data? That is, in a research environment, is IRB approval needed to work with data once it is re-identified?
What are important issues? What are risks and harms? Which issues are most likely to occur, and if they do occur, which are most likely to have significant adverse impact? |
Post 1
| No. Subsequent research should be able to use re-identified results with IRB approval,
but publicly exposing people (particularly those who are unprepared for the results) is very likely to end badly. |
Post 2
| No, unless that person is willing to make their personal data publically available. |
Post 3
| Re-identified results should not be posted online. I do not see the real utility gained
from it. Other researchers should be able to recreate your results given your methods if they wish to. |
Post 4
| No, reidentifications should not be publicly posted, but researchers can contact the
original researcher and ask to use the data (and then get IRB approval). One problem is that if data is transferred repeatedly, it may become less secure as it spreads. |
Post 5
| Researchers may not release re-identifications publicly online, since there is no
mechanism to ensure ethical use of the data. |
Post 6
| They should not be published re-identified.
Public data + public data should equal private data in this instance because the resulting data was always intended to be private; as such, the researcher should not be the one to make it public, simply issue the warning that it could be re-identified. IRB approval should be used for the sake of maintaining and encouraging ethical boundaries. |
Post 7
| NO. The specific reidentification information should only be released to people who can
be legally bound to keep it private - aka not internet users. |
Post 8
| It definitely seems iffy to consider re-identified data as "public", as the data that were
exposed were originally meant to be hidden. Re-identifying is still "publishing" identifying information. |
Post 9
| No, researchers should not post re-identifications online. With approval,
subsequent research can use the re-identified results. Public data combined with other public data does not yield private data - the new data is still public. |
Post 10
| I don't think researchers should be able to post re-identified information. The reason is that the difficulty in actually finding this information might serve as a disincentive to acquiring it, and so a researcher should actually be making the data easier to get. |
Post 11
| A researcher does not need to post re-identifiactions publicly online because those
who are interested could just follow his/her methods. There is no reason to make these people's information easily accessible to people who most likely won't be able to add any new solutions. |
IQSS | Data Privacy Lab | Silent Spring Institute | Northeastern University