Personal data anonymization in the context of artificial intelligence: from de-Identification to anonymization

Background . The processing of medical data by artificial intelligence (AI) systems requires mandatory de-identification, yet simple removal of direct identifiers does not ensure anonymity. Modern AI models can re-identify individuals from indirect attributes, leaving a measurable residual risk. Objective . The aim of this study was to define the boundaries of de-identification in the AI era, systematize protection methods, and assess the actual attitudes of future physicians toward patient data handling. Methods . We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of 1,283 medical university students and residents (me dian age 21 years). A self-administered questionnaire was used. Data were analyzed in Python (pandas) using chi-squared tests and Cramér’s V to compare differences across training levels. Results . Entering de-identified clinical text into cloud-based AI services was considered acceptable by 61.5 % of respon dents; 12.4 % had already uploaded real patient data, with 1.2 % doing so in identifiable form. Awareness of risks did not deter risky behavior: those who uploaded data had higher self-assessed risk knowledge (3.53 vs. 3.36, p < 0.0001), and 22 % admitted their actions were unacceptable yet continued them. The proportion of uploaders increased from 7.5 % in junior years to 21.0 % in senior years (χ² = 43.3, Cramér’s V = 0.18, p < 0.0001), while willingness to inform patients about AI use declined from 43.4 % to 24.4 %. Conclusions . Anonymity is not a state to be achieved but a continuous process of managing residual re-identification risk. Effective protection requires institutional bans on sharing de-identified data with public cloud services, adoption of methods with quantifiable residual risk (differential privacy, federated learning, homomorphic encryption), and strengthening education al curricula on ethics and information security.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Patient-Oriented Medicine and Pharmacy
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.37489/2949-1924-0147
Primary Topic
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Personal data anonymization in the context of artificial intelligence: from de-Identification to anonymization

М. П. Потапов, S. А. Kostrov
Patient-Oriented Medicine and Pharmacy
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
article

Personal data anonymization in the context of artificial intelligence: from de-Identification to anonymization

М. П. Потапов, S. А. Kostrov
article en

Abstract

Background . The processing of medical data by artificial intelligence (AI) systems requires mandatory de-identification, yet simple removal of direct identifiers does not ensure anonymity. Modern AI models can re-identify individuals from indirect attributes, leaving a measurable residual risk. Objective . The aim of this study was to define the boundaries of de-identification in the AI era, systematize protection methods, and assess the actual attitudes of future physicians toward patient data handling. Methods . We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of 1,283 medical university students and residents (me dian age 21 years). A self-administered questionnaire was used. Data were analyzed in Python (pandas) using chi-squared tests and Cramér’s V to compare differences across training levels. Results . Entering de-identified clinical text into cloud-based AI services was considered acceptable by 61.5 % of respon dents; 12.4 % had already uploaded real patient data, with 1.2 % doing so in identifiable form. Awareness of risks did not deter risky behavior: those who uploaded data had higher self-assessed risk knowledge (3.53 vs. 3.36, p < 0.0001), and 22 % admitted their actions were unacceptable yet continued them. The proportion of uploaders increased from 7.5 % in junior years to 21.0 % in senior years (χ² = 43.3, Cramér’s V = 0.18, p < 0.0001), while willingness to inform patients about AI use declined from 43.4 % to 24.4 %. Conclusions . Anonymity is not a state to be achieved but a continuous process of managing residual re-identification risk. Effective protection requires institutional bans on sharing de-identified data with public cloud services, adoption of methods with quantifiable residual risk (differential privacy, federated learning, homomorphic encryption), and strengthening education al curricula on ethics and information security.

Patient-Oriented Medicine and PharmacyVol. 4(3)
Yaroslavl State Medical Academy (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon