Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41269747›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Considerations for Patient Privacy of Large Language Models in Health Care: Scoping Review.

Xiaoying Zhong, Siyi Li, Zhao Chen, Long Ge, Dongdong Yu, Shijia Wang, Liangzhen You, Hongcai Shang

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. The Continuity Trap in Data Science Health Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Xiaoying Zhong *Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, null, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1861-4046
Siyi Li *Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, null, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2649-9933
Zhao ChenInstitute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3911-1125
Long GeDepartment of Health Policy and Health Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3555-1107
Dongdong YuSecond Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2759-7647
Shijia WangDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, null, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8054-9855
Liangzhen You *Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, null, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7422-1680
Hongcai Shang *Key Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of the Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, null, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe application of large language models (LLMs) in health care holds significant potential for enhancing patient care and advancing medical research. However, the protection of patient privacy remains a critical issue, especially when handling patient health information (PHI).

objectiveThis scoping review aims to evaluate the adequacy of current approaches and identify areas in need of improvement to ensure robust patient privacy protection in the existing studies about PHI-LLMs within the health care domain.

methodsA search of the literature published from January 1, 2022, to July 20, 2025, was performed on July 20, 2025, using 2 databases (PubMed and Embase). This scoping review focused on the following three research questions: (1) What studies on the development and application of LLMs using PHI currently exist within the health care domain? (2) What patient privacy considerations are addressed in existing PHI-LLMs research, and are these measures sufficient? (3) How can future research on the development and application of LLMs using PHI better protect patient privacy? Studies were included if they focused on the development and application of LLMs within health care using PHI, encompassing activities such as model construction, fine-tuning, optimization, testing, and performance comparison. Eligible literature comprised original research articles written in English. Conversely, studies were excluded if they used publicly available datasets, under the assumption that such data have been adequately deidentified. Additionally, non-English publications, reviews, abstracts, incomplete reports, and preprints were excluded from the review due to the lack of rigorous peer review.

resultsThis study systematically identified 9823 studies on PHI-LLM and included 464 studies published between 2022 and 2025. Among the 464 studies, (1) a small number of studies neglected ethical review (n=45, 9.7%) and patient informed consent (n=148, 31.9%) during the research process, (2) more than a third of the studies (n=178, 38.4%) failed to report whether to implement effective measures to protect PHI, and (3) there was a significant lack of transparency and comprehensive detail in anonymization and deidentification methods.

conclusionsWe propose comprehensive recommendations across 3 phases-study design, implementation, and reporting-to strengthen patient privacy protection and transparency in PHI-LLM. This study emphasizes the urgent need for the development of stricter regulatory frameworks and the adoption of advanced privacy protection technologies to effectively safeguard PHI. It is anticipated that future applications of LLMs in the health care field will achieve a balance between innovation and robust patient privacy protection, thereby enhancing ethical standards and scientific credibility.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityDelivery of Health CareLanguagePrivacyHumansLarge Language Modelshealth carelarge language modelspatient health informationpatient privacyscoping review

Identifiers

PMID41269747
PMCPMC12680930

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.