ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Introduction to secure data sharing in primary care using the federated causal learning models.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn primary healthcare research, there are core challenges such as data silos and missing data. Furthermore, the current high technical barriers severely limit effective cross-regional data analysis.
methodsThis work was the first to apply the federated causal learning framework to primary healthcare. Through two case studies, we demonstrated how to estimate cross-regional causal effects without sharing raw data, guided by a detailed step-by-step protocol. Furthermore, we designed a systematic simulation study tailored to the characteristics of primary healthcare data to evaluate the performance of this framework under various missingness mechanisms and proportion settings.
resultsThis framework was effectively applied to both chronic non-communicable disease and infectious disease, two major issues that remain public health priorities requiring sustained attention. In the cardiovascular disease case, the estimated average treatment effect (ATE) from the federated model (ATE=0.017) was very close to the result of the centralised model (ATE=0.018). Under all missing data scenarios, the stable model consistently achieved perfect or near-perfect coverage rates, maintaining performance even under missingness rates as high as 20%. In addition, the coverage of the unstable model remained robustly above 96.10% even when model assumptions were violated. DISCUSSION: This work demonstrated the effectiveness and practicality of federated causal learning in primary healthcare data, which was characterised by decentralisation and susceptibility to missing data.
conclusionThis framework provided a feasible solution for primary healthcare workers to safely conduct federated causal inference. It held promise for advancing data-driven precision decision-making in primary care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.