Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20080077604
Track the progress of public participation in the review of this pending patent application, and view
application details. The menu on the right will help you navigate this patent application. Subscribe to
the community enables you to receive updates on this application via email so that you can easly follow recent activity.
LATEST PRIOR ART
| Date | Title | Reviewer |
|---|---|---|
| 07/03/08 | The MIRC DICOM Anonymizer | Steven Pearson |
| 07/02/08 | Replacing Personally-Identifying Information in Medical Records, the Scrub System | Steven Pearson |
| 05/26/08 | Federal HIPAA Privacy Rule | Jeff Morrill |
DISCUSSION
Steven Pearson (1 day ago)
"Building an anonymized catalogued radiology museum in PACS: a feasibility study" also looks potentially interesting as prior art, but I cannot find a free copy of the entire treatise, only this abstract: http://bjr.birjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/944/666
which by itself doesn't appear to offer more than the existing examples of prior art here.Steven Pearson (2 days ago)
The application states that "the primary limitation in the prior art methods is the inability to provide a masking for the secondary object data that may comprise identification details of the medical object." Presumably its contribution may be centered in this area. I notice that the description does suggest that one can anonymize various kinds of secondary data, but I'm not satisfied it does a good job teaching how to do that. I found herein two approaches for non-text data: (1) convert to text, anonymize, convert back, and (2) define what a confidential wave-form looks like, and find/replace it in the wave-form data. I can understand how (1) works, at least where the secondary data type already has conversions to and from text defined (as I don't see any such method elaborated here). It may just be my ignorance of this specfic method, but the description for (2) in the application is not very satisfying. E.g. the application says "The object data being present in the frequency domain waveform format, the element of the object data matching a predetermined frequency can be identified as a confidential identification data." I guess confidential data somehow has a unique frequency? Anyway, aside from these methods, the application seems to simply go back again and again to the notion of "find confidential data and replace it", which does not seem by itself to be a novel concept.Susan Murray (11 days ago)
Claim 1 could be read as being broad enough to cover manual redaction of hard copy documents. In that regard, it's reasonable to raise HIPAA itself. However, note that the applicant has narrower depedent claims that might warrant some attention as well as more detailed disclosure which may be able to support more narrowly drafted claims, particularly relating to specifics about data structures and filtering mechanics. Some focus in that direction might be useful.PEER TO PATENT ACTIVITY
All
Discuss Patent Applications
7 comments posted
Size of Community: 6
7 comments posted
Size of Community: 6
Upload + Explain Prior Art
3 submitted
3 submitted
Research Prior Art
1 research notes
1 research notes
Annotate and Evaluate Prior Art
0 prior art ratings
3 citations
0 prior art ratings
3 citations
WHAT IS THIS APPLICATION ABOUT
