A multiple imputation approach to disclosure limitation for high-age individuals in longitudinal studies

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 17, 2010, Pages 1769-1778

  An, Di ^a   Little, Roderick J A ^b   McNally, James W ^b  

^a MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Confidentiality; Disclosure protection; Longitudinal data; Multiple imputation; Survival analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENTIALITY; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH INSURANCE; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; PATIENT CODING; RESEARCH;

AGE FACTORS; COHORT STUDIES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DISCLOSURE; FEMALE; HEART DISEASES; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE;

EID: 77955164506     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3974     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Dempster AP, Laird N, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1977; 39:1-37.
2. An D, Little RJ. Multiple imputation: an alternative to top coding for statistical disclosure control. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2007; 170:923-940.
3. Reiter JP. Inference for partially synthetic, public use microdata sets. Survey Methodology 2003; 29:181-188.
4. Little RJ. Statistical analysis of masked data. Journal of Official Statistics 1993; 9:407-426.
5. Rubin DB. Discussion: statistical disclosure limitation. Journal of Official Statistics 1993; 9:461-468.
6. Raghunathan TE, Reiter JP, Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for statistical disclosure limitation. Journal of Official Statistics 2003; 19:1-16.
7. Little RJ, Liu F, Raghunathan T. Statistical disclosure techniques based on multiple imputation. In Applied Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference from Incomplete-Data Perspectives, Gelman A, Meng X-L (eds). Wiley: New York, 2004; 141-152.
8. Reiter JP. Satisfying disclosure restrictions with synthetic data sets. Journal of Official Statistics 2002; 18:531-544.
9. Reiter JP. Releasing multiply-imputed, synthetic public use microdata: an illustration and empirical study. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2005; 168:185-205.
10. Reiter JP. Significance tests for multi-component estimands from multiply-imputed, synthetic microdata. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2005; 131(2):365-377.
11. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996.
12. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information (the Privacy Rule).
13. Nietert PJ, Sutherland SE, Bachman DL, Keil JE, Gazes P, Boyle E. Charleston Heart Study (Computer file). CPSR version. Medical University of South Carolina (producer): Charleston, SC, 2000. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributor): Ann Arbor, MI, 2004.
14. Little RJ, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. Wiley: New York, 2002.
15. Reiter JP, Mitra R. Estimating risks of identification disclosure in partially synthetic data. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 2009; 1(1):99-110.
16. Drechsler J, Reiter JP. Accounting for intruder uncertainty due to sampling when estimating identification disclosure risks in partially synthetic data. In Privacy in Statistical Databases, Domingo-Ferrer J, Saygin Y (eds). Springer-Verlag: New York, 2008; 227-238.