Considerations for social networks and health data sharing: An overview

Dana K. Pasquale*, Tom Wolff, Gabriel Varela, jimi adams, Peter J. Mucha, Brea L. Perry, Thomas W. Valente, James Moody

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

Abstract

The use of network analysis as a tool has increased exponentially as more clinical researchers see the benefits of network data for modeling of infectious disease transmission or translational activities in a variety of areas, including patient-caregiving teams, provider networks, patient-support networks, and adoption of health behaviors or treatments, to name a few. Yet, relational data such as network data carry a higher risk of deductive disclosure. Cases of reidentification have occurred and this is expected to become more common as computational ability increases. Recent data sharing policies aim to promote reproducibility, support replicability, and protect federal investment in the effort to collect these research data by making them available for secondary analyses. However, typical practices to protect individual-level clinical research data may not be sufficiently protective of participant privacy in the case of network data, nor in some cases do they permit secondary data analysis. When sharing data, researchers must balance security, accessibility, reproducibility, and adaptability (suitability for secondary analyses). Here, we provide background about applying network analysis to health and clinical research, describe the pros and cons of applying typical practices for sharing clinical data to network data, and provide recommendations for sharing network data.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)28-35
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of Epidemiology
Volume102
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2025

Funding

D.K.P., T.W., G.V., and J.M. were supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) investment #2024271 made to Duke University and P.J.M. was supported by NSF investment #2140024 made to Dartmouth University. J.M and G.V were partially supported by NICHD 2 R25 HD079352. B.L.P. was supported by the National Institute on Aging (R01 AG057739) awarded to Indiana University. D.K.P., T.W., G.V., and J.M. were supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) award #2024271 made to Duke University and P.J.M. was supported by NSF award #2140024 made to Dartmouth University. J.M and G.V were partially supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) award R25 HD079352 made to Duke University. B.L.P. was supported by the U.S. NIH National Institute on Aging award R01 AG057739 made to Indiana University.

Keywords

  • Data security
  • Data sharing
  • Network data
  • Privacy
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Secondary Data Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Considerations for social networks and health data sharing: An overview'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this