abstract: An evaluation metric is an absolute necessity for measuring the performance of any system and complexity of any data. In this paper, we have discussed how to determine the level of complexity of code-mixed social media texts that are growing rapidly due to multilingual interference. In general, texts written in multiple languages are often hard to comprehend and analyze. At the same time, in order to meet the demands of analysis, it is also necessary to determine the complexity of a particular document or a text segment. Thus, in the present paper, we have discussed the existing metrics for determining the code-mixing complexity of a corpus, their advantages and shortcomings as well as proposed several improvements on the existing metrics. The new index better reflects the variety and complexity of a multilingual document. Also, the index can be applied to a sentence and seamlessly extended to a paragraph or an entire document. We have employed two existing code-mixed corpora to suit the requirements of our study.
author: Souvick Ghosh^1^; Satanu Ghosh^2^; Dipankar Das^3^
bibliography: cicling.bib
title: Complexity Metric for Code-Mixed Social Media Text

# Introduction

Social media text differs from other conventional text in many ways. It is noisy in nature and requires comprehensive processing from a multilingual point of view. In social media communication, a multilingual speaker often uses more than one language. Therefore, the communication, inherently informal in nature, presents the scientific community with a challenging yet interesting problem.

First of all, we need to understand the necessity of language switching. Is it motivational? Or is it circumstantial? Although mixing of languages was prevalent in verbal communication, it was the proliferation of social media which accelerated the use of multiple languages in a single written communication and this is motivated by both social and conversational needs  . Sometimes, the speaker is not competent in the language he is writing. The lack of vocabulary provokes him to use words from his native language as a substitute. On some other occasions, the need is purely social and is used by the writer to mark him as part of a large group.

Automatic identification of the code switching points is important as it helps to understand the frequency of code switching or code mixing and subsequent complexity of the text. Also, it would allow us to determine the language specific models which are better suited for the analysis of such text. It is also important to understand the differences between code switching and code mixing as both the terms are used interchangeably in the literature. In our work, the term 'Code- Switching' refers to inter-sentential language shifts while the term 'Code-Mixing' refers to intra-sentential shifts of language.

In the present work, we have used short utterances collected from Facebook pages and Twitter data for our analysis. As the dataset is purely based on Indian social media text, it is essential that we give a brief statistics about the degree of multilingualism in India. There are more than 20 officially recognized languages in India. The number of Hindi speakers range from 14.5% to 24.5% of total population (source:Wikipedia[^1]). Other languages are spoken by 10% or less out of the total population. English and Hindi are mostly used for official communication in India. Similarly, it has been also observed that the diversity of Indian languages and the necessity for faster and efficient communication motivates the mixing of languages in Indian social media context. This brings us to one of the challenging problems, i.e. transliteration. Most of the time, the languages like Hindi or Bengali are not written using their native scripts - Devanagari for Hindi and Eastern Neo Brahmi script for Bengali. Instead, the users prefer using Roman script as it is more convenient with a regular keyboard. While analyzing a code-mixed transliterated text, it is often useful to determine the complexity of the corpus. For any task on code-mixed corpora such as language identification, part-of-speech tagging, information retrieval or question answering, it is important for the researchers to compare the difficulty of their work with regards to the level of language mixing in the text. Also, it is expected that along with the increasing complexity and more code-mixing in a text, the accuracy of text processing would decrease and the error rates would increase.

In Section 2, we have discussed the previous work done in related area. In Section 3, we provide a brief statistics of the code-mixed corpora and its preparation. The index is presented in Section 4. The working of the index is further elaborated using various cases and examples in Section 5. Section 6 contains the results and finally, Section 7 concludes the paper and discusses the scopes of future work.

# Related Work

In 2001, Kilgarriff  discussed and pointed out that corpus linguistics do not have proper methods for comparing corpora. Most of the corpus descriptions are textual and based on the opinions of the researchers. Such impressions are highly subjective and not a proper measure of corpus similarity or complexity. In contrast, Whenever we work on a new corpus, the questions that are inevitably raised ae about the limitations and benefits of using that corpus. The size and homogeneity of the data are some of the factors which have been used intensively. However, such approaches are mainly word based and are applicable for monolingual texts.

Measuring corpus similarity has a wide array of applications. It has theoretical as well as research applications where one can judge the complexity of the dataset before performing their technical analysis. Also, one may want to replace a dataset with another. It is beneficial only if there is some way to determine whether the two datasets are similar and comparable in terms of their complexity and usage. This would in turn help in inter-domain portability of NLP systems too.

To the best of our knowledge, Gambäck and Das  proposed the first index for code-mixed social media text. Termed as Code Mixing Index (CMI), the index tries to assess the level of code-switching in an utterance. The measure aimed at comparing one code-switched corpus with another. Gambäck and Das  worked on Hindi/Bengali-English Facebook data collected from various chat groups. The corpora introduced by them has 28.5% of the messages written in at least two languages. CMI can be described as the fraction of total words that belong to languages other than the most dominant language in the text,

$CMI = 100*[1-\frac{max{w_i}}{n-u}]$ , if n \> u $CMI = 0$ , if n=u

where n-u is the sum of N languages present in the utterance of their respective number of words and max{$w_i$} is the highest number of words belonging to a particular language where n is total number of tokens and u is the number of language independent tags. Gambäck and Das  averaged the CMI values for all the sentences to obtain 'CMI all' and for only the code-mixed sentences to obtain 'CMI mixed', respectively.

However, CMI considers only the fraction of words in the corpus which are code-switched. We have used CMI as an initial parameter and have suggested some improvements which would take into account the number of languages and the number of code-switching points present in the corpus.

# Corpora Details

The present task requires a social media corpus which has diversity in terms of languages and code-mixed content. Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation [^2] (FIRE) organized a shared task on Mixed Script Information Retrieval. The data set used for training and test suited our purpose perfectly. Another shared task was organized by the Twelfth International Conference on Natural Language Processing [^3] (ICON-2015). This data set was bilingual in nature and used code-mixed social media text. Therefore, We have modified these two corpora in order to accomplish our task.

## FIRE 2015 Shared Task Corpus

We have modified the transliterated corpus which was provided by the organizers of FIRE 2015 Shared Task on Mixed Script Information Retrieval. The dataset contains 3701 sentences and 63526 word tokens. Each word may belong to one of the nine languages present in the entire dataset. The nine languages were Bengali (Bn), English (En), Gujarati (Gu), Hindi (Hi), Kannada (Ka), Malayalam (Ml), Marathi (Mr), Tamil (Ta) and Telugu (Te). The dataset is extremely multilingual in nature. The languages present in the dataset are the most prevalent ones that we can find in Indian social media context. It must be noted that the words of a single query usually came from 1 or 2 languages and rarely from 3 different languages. This is in line with the language mixing trends that we have witnessed in social media context. The users, even if familiar with multiple languages, rarely use more than three languages while writing their posts or tweeting. As a matter of fact, most of the sentences are bilingual in nature with one of the dominant languages as either English or Hindi. Thus, there are sentences that mix Tamil and English words, or Bengali and Hindi words, but not for example, Gujrati and Kannada words. The named entities (marked as NE), language independent words (marked as X) and mixed words containing intra-word language switches (marked as MIX), were all considered undefined and assigned with UN (universal) tag. The numbers of utterances, tokens for each of the language pairs in the training set are given in Table .

| **Language Tags** | **\# Sentences** | **\# Words** | **Percentage (%) Of Corpus** |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| English (En) | 2665 | 21996 | 34.63 |
| Bengali (Bn) | 355 | 4919 | 7.74 |
| Gujarati (Gu) | 165 | 1075 | 1.69 |
| Hindi (Hi) | 614 | 5897 | 9.28 |
| Kannada (Ka) | 373 | 2212 | 3.48 |
| Malayalam (Ml) | 151 | 1390 | 2.19 |
| Marathi (Mr) | 229 | 2414 | 3.8 |
| Tamil (Ta) | 342 | 3694 | 5.82 |
| Telugu (Te) | 603 | 7002 | 1.1 |
| Language Independent | 2582 | 12927 | 20.35 |

Statistics of FIRE 2015 Corpus.

## ICON 2015 Shared Task Corpus

Another recent shared task was conducted by Twelfth International Conference on Natural Language Processing (ICON-2015), for part-of-speech tagging of transliterated social media text. In the shared task, the code-mixed data was collected from Bengali-English Facebook chat groups. The sentences are in mixed English-Bengali and English-Hindi - and have been obtained from the "JU Confession" Facebook group, which contains posts in English-Bengali with a few Hindi words in some cases.

We have modified the ICON Shared Task Corpora for developing our index metric. The dataset contains three languages - Bengali, Hindi and English. It contains 2341 sentences and 38199 word tokens in total. The statistics for the dataset have been presented in Table .

| **Language Tags** | **Number of Sentences** | **Number of Words Present** | **Percentage (%) Of Corpus** |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| English (En) | 1563 | 15435 | 40.41 |
| Bengali (Bn) | 1059 | 13002 | 34.04 |
| Hindi (Hi) | 153 | 1006 | 2.63 |
| Language Independent | 2268 | 8756 | 22.92 |

Statistics of ICON 2015 Corpus.

# Complexity Factor (CF)

We introduce an index, termed hereafter as Complexity Factor (CF), to measure the complexity of a multilingual corpus. This index can be applied to any sentence, paragraph or document which contains multiple languages. The index uses the concept of CMI as proposed by Gambäck and Das  and makes some practical additions on it.

Complexity Factor(CF) considers three different aspects while analyzing any text - Language Factor (LF), Switching Factor (SF) and Mix Factor (MF). CF can be calculated for sentences and easily extended to paragraphs and entire documents. In the next section, we have proposed three variants of Complexity Factor. Complexity Factor 1 (henceforth mentioned as CF1) is a simple baseline which considers LF, SF and MF. Complexity Factor 2 (CF2) and Complexity Factor 3 (CF3) are the two indexes which have been carefully fine-tuned to efficiently represent the complexity of any transliterated text.

## Language Factor (LF)

This factor represents the number of different languages present in a sentence as a fraction of the total number of words in the sentences. It is evident that if a sentence becomes more multilingual, the complexity increases manifold. For example, For any given sentence, Language Factor can be defined as,

$LF = \frac{W}{N}$

where W is the number of words and N is the number of distinct languages in the sentence. Sentence 1: "*Boss, **\<Bn\> ajkal ki korchis \</Bn\>**? We have been getting no news about you!*" (English Translation: Boss, what are you doing in these days? We have been getting no news about you! ) Sentence 2: *"**\<Bn\> Kal khela dekhli? \</Bn\>** What a game! \<Hi\> Virat ne toh kamaal kar diya! \</Hi\>"* (English translation: Did you watch the match yesterday? What a game! Virat was simply superb!)

Sentence 1 contains two languages, Bengali and English, while Sentence 2 contains three languages - English, Bengali and Hindi. In both the sentences, Bengali words are boldfaced and Hindi words are underlined. Language Factor is 6 for Sentence 1 (W=12, N=2) and 4 for Sentence 2 (W=12, N=3). It must be noted that longer the text block we are considering, it has more probability of finding multiple languages in it. This factor is inversely proportional to Complexity Factor (CF) and rewards shorter sentences with more distinct languages in it. The LF can range from W (in case of a monolingual text) to 1 (when each word belongs to a different language).

## Switching Factor (SF)

It is essential to consider the number of times the writer switches from one language to the other. As the number of switches increases, it becomes more complex to analyze the text for various tasks like language identification, part-of-speech tagging, question-answering, summarization, etc.

For any given sentence, Switching Factor is defined as the ratio of number of switching points present in the sentence to the maximum number of switching points possible for that sentence. For a block of W words, the maximum number of code-switches occurs when each alternate words belong to different languages. So the maximum number of switching points for a W-word sentence is W-1. Switching Factor, denoted by SF, can be written as:

$SF = \frac{S}{W-1}$ , if W \> 1

$SF = 0$ , if W = 1

where S is the number of code-switches and W is the number of words in the sentences or block of text.

Consider the following examples, Sentence 1: ***Ki** post **korcho**? Public forum **eta*** (English translation: What are you posting? This is a public forum) Sentence 2: *It is painful **je khelata harlam*** (English translation: It is painful that we lost the match) Both the sentences contain a mix of Bengali and English words (Bengali words are boldfaced). It should be noted that while both sentences contain 3 words each in Bengali and English, the relative arrangement of the words make Sentence 1 more complex than Sentence 2. For sentence 1, SF is 0.8 (S=4, W=6) while for sentence 2, it is only 0.2 (S=1, W=6). Thus, we can observe that Switching Factor captures this complexity factor and it is directly proportional to Complexity Factor (CF). For a single word sentence, SF = 0. SF can reach the maximum value of 1 when no two consecutive words belong to the same language.

## Mix Factor (MF)

Mix Factor, referred to as MF for the rest of the paper, is based on Code Mixing Index (CMI). It is the ratio of number of words which are not written in the dominant language of the sentence to the total number of language-dependent words present in the sentence. It can be written as:

$MF = \frac{W' - max\{w\}}{W'} $ , if W' \> 0

$MF = 0 $ , if W' = 0

where W' is the number of words in distinct languages, i.e., the number of words except the undefined ones, max{w} is the maximum number of words belonging to the most frequent language in the sentence. Sentence 1: *"Boss, **ajkal ki korchis**? We have been getting no news about you!"* (English Translation: Boss, what are you doing these days? We have been getting no news about you! ) Sentence 2: *"**Kal khela dekhli**? What a game! Virat ne toh kamaal kar diya!"* (English translation: Did you watch the match yesterday? What a game! Virat was simply superb!) For sentence 1, MF is 0.25 (BN: 3, EN: 9) while for sentence 2, MF is 0.5 (BN: 3, EN: 3, HI: 6)

MF can range from $ 1 - \frac{1}{W} $ (when every word in the sentence belongs to a different language) to 1 (for monolingual texts).

## Complexity Factor

Finally, we have combined all the three factors to formulate the Complexity Factor as,

$CF=\frac{a*MF+b*SF}{f(LF)}$

where a and b are the weights for Mix Factor (MF) and Switching Factor (SF), respectively. On the other hand, f is a function of Language Factor(LF) that we use as a dampening factor. After experimentation with the weights, we finally settled a = 50 and b = 50. We calculated CF by having f(LF) = LF, by using a linear function, $ f(LF) = (\frac{0.25}{W-1})(LF-1) + 1 $ and by using a geometric function, $ f(LF) = \frac{arctan(LF)}{\pi} + 0.75 $. We have calculated CF in three different ways and presented our results in Table 3 and Table 4.

$CF1 = \frac{50*MF+50*SF}{LF}$

$CF2 = \frac{50*MF+50*SF}{(\frac{0.25}{W-1})(LF-1) + 1}$

$CF3 = \frac{50*MF+50*SF}{\frac{arctan(LF)}{\pi} + 0.75}$

We have considered MF and SF to be equally important while determining the code-mixing complexity of the social media text. However, the number of languages in social media texts is often limited to two or three. So, the impact of the LF on complexity has been dampened by the use of a linear function (in CF2) and a geometric function (in CF3). This ensures that the complexity of any given text is not heavily reduced by the language factor.

# Working of the Index

We have presented a few test cases to compare the performance of our index in comparison to the existing index (CMI). The first four cases presented are from a purely mathematical perspective and serves the purpose of illustrating the mathematical precision of the index which we proposed here. For the remaining cases, we have presented examples from the dataset to elucidate our objectives. In all the examples, $w_i$ and $l_i$ represents the word and the language at position i, respectively. *Case 1: w1/l1 w2/l2 w3/l3 w4/l4 w5/l5 w6/l6 w7/l7 w8/l8 w9/l9 w10/l10* The sentence contains 10 words each belonging to a different language. Ideally, any index should denote the complexity of such a code-mixed sentence as 100 (in a scale of 0-100). There is no better example of a more complex sentence than this from a multilingual perspective. CMI gives a value of 90 for such a sentence. CF2 and CF3 both give the complexity as 95. *Case 2: w1/l1 w2/l1 w3/l1 w4/l1 w5/l1 w6/l1 w7/l1 w8/l1 w9/l11 w10/l1* The sentence contains 10 words each belonging to the same language. Here, we would expect the index to show complexity as zero. Each of the three indexes, CMI, CF2 and CF3, gives the complexity as 0. In case of CF2 and CF3, two of the three components - the language factor, switching factor and the mix factor all are zero. *Case 3: w1/l1 w2/l2 w3/l1 w4/l2 w5/l1 w6/l2 w7/l1 w8/l2 w9/l11 w10/l2* The sentence contains 10 words belonging to two languages. The words are arranged such that no two consecutive words belong to the same language. CMI calculates the complexity of the sentence to be 50. The complexities, as given by CF2 and CF3 are 67.5 and 63.2, respectively (LF=5, MF=0.5, SF=1). *Case 4: w1/l1 w2/l1 w3/l1 w4/l1 w5/l1 w6/l2 w7/l2 w8/l2 w9/l12 w10/l2* The sentence contains 10 words belonging to two languages. The words are arranged such that first five words belong to the one language and the next five words belong to a second language. Once again, CMI calculates the complexity of the index as 50. CF2 and CF3 calculates the complexity to be 27.52 and 25.73, respectively (LF=5, MF=0.5, SF=0.11). It has to be mentioned that Complexity Factor correctly estimates the sentence to be less complex than the previous example (which contains more switching). The previous examples were theoretical to mainly highlight the mathematical background of the model. We have collected a few examples from our corpus to further illustrate the robustness of our index. Once again, we compared it with respect to CMI. *Case 5: Koi ni bhai , apne dbc wale hosla ni haarte ... "think to score goals instead of thinking abt goalkeepers"* The above sentence contains 9 English and 8 Hindi words. The value of CMI is 47 while CF2 and CF3 are 23.21 and 21.31, respectively. Complexity Factor Indexes are less than the CMI because there is only one language switch in the sentence. *Case 6: mari bike ma puncture padayu* In the above sentence, there are 2 English and 3 Gujarati words with 4 language switches (each alternate word belongs to a different language). Complexity Factor for the sentence is 64.22 (as in CF2) and 61.75 (as in CF3) with the highest possible Code-Switch Factor (which is 1). CMI gives a value of 40 because it considers only the fraction of non-dominant languages present. *Case 7: Mi maza maharastra prem dhakvla .. tu swapnil joshi la hate karun jar saharukla support karanar asel tar saalam malakun ........... I like swapnil because he's maharastrian ... also I have never unbend opinion about you ........* In the above sentence, there are 15 English and 15 Marathi words with 5 language switches. Although the length of the sentence is quite long, it has few language switches. CF2 and CF3 recognize that aspect and assign a complexity of 28.57 and 26.02, respectively while CMI assigns it a complexity of 50. *Case 8: Steve : 10 th anniversary celebarate pannama poiduvomo - nu .* In this case, we have selected a smaller sentence with 3 English and 3 Tamil words. There is 1 language switch present. Once again, CMI assigns it a complexity of 50. CF2 and CF3 are 22.97 and 24.79 respectively. These values are less than that of Case 7 because of fewer number of language switches. *Case 9: BIG B sings the eternal journey of life well .......... " tu shola ban jo khud jalke janha rashan karde ... ekla jalo re "* This sentence contains words from 3 different languages - English (9 words), Bengali (3 words) and Hindi (9 words). The high proportion of language mixing makes CMI value 57. However, the words of all the languages occur in clusters with only 2 language switchings. Therefore, the CF2 and CF3 values are 30.09 and 26.86, respectively (as it considers the relative ordering of language words along with the presence of non-dominant language). *Case 10: Happy Rakshabandhan(Rakhi ) ...... Piyali Kar Lipika Bisht Lopamudra Sarkar Mandira Agrawal Payel Ghosh Trishona Vanhi* This is another example which contains only two words which are language specific (1 English and 1 Bengali word). The remaining words are named entities. CMI assigns it a complexity of 50. CF2 and CF3 values are 25.45 and 23.55 respectively. *Case 11: r february te amar breakup hoy .* This sentence contains 2 English and 4 Bengali words with 4 language switches. CMI value is 33 while CF2 and CF3 values are 45.45 and 43.1 respectively. The frequent switching of languages makes this sentence more complex than usual and Complexity Factor captures that aspect. In the following section, we discuss the range of all the indexes in both the corpora.

# Results on Different Corpora

We calculated the complexity of the FIRE and ICON corpora. The results are presented in Table and Table . The minimum and maximum values show the range of the indexes for both the corpora. It may be noted that CF2 and CF3 shows a broader range than CMI in case of FIRE corpus. The primary reason for this is the presence of more languages in the FIRE corpus. Words per sentence has been used to highlight the length of sentences present in both the corpora. The average value of the index reflects the complexity of the entire corpus. In Figure , graphs have been plotted where X axis represents the length of the sentence and Y axis represents the index (CF2).

## The FIRE 2015 Shared Task Corpus

| **Index**      | **Minimum Value** | **Maximum Value** | **Average** |
|:---------------|:------------------|:------------------|:------------|
| CMI            | 0                 | 50                | 11.65       |
| CF1            | 0                 | 75                | 2.51        |
| CF2            | 0                 | 75                | 10.54       |
| CF3            | 0                 | 75                | 9.88        |
| Words/sentence | 1                 | 1592              | 17.16       |

Range and Mean of Each Index and Words per Sentence (In FIRE Corpus).

## The ICON 2015 Shared Task Corpus

| **Index**      | **Minimum Value** | **Maximum Value** | **Average** |
|:---------------|:------------------|:------------------|:------------|
| CMI            | 0                 | 57                | 5.73        |
| CF1            | 0                 | 33.5              | 1.02        |
| CF2            | 0                 | 50                | 4.83        |
| CF3            | 0                 | 47.38             | 4.51        |
| Words/sentence | 1                 | 367               | 16.32       |

Range and Mean of Each Index and Words per Sentence (In ICON Corpus).

The results suggest that the FIRE Corpus was more complex than the ICON Corpus with average value of CF2 and CF3 over the entire corpus being 10.54 and 9.88 respectively. For ICON corpus, CF2 and CF3 are 4.83 and 4.71 respectively which is considerably less than that of FIRE Corpus.

# Conclusion and Future Work

In this paper, we have discussed the need and application of various indexes to represent the complexity of code-mixing in transliterated social media text. We have used various examples - both mathematical and from real-life text - to demonstrate the working of Code Mixing Index. We have highlighted few of the challenges that this index face and have proposed a new index - Complexity Factor (with two variations CF1 and CF2) - which takes into account the relative ordering of words (or the number of language switches) and the number of languages present in addition to the presence of words from non-dominant languages (as done in CMI). We have proposed three variations of Complexity Factor - CF1 serves as a baseline or raw index. CF2 and CF3 are more versatile and usable. CF2 uses linear interpolation while CF3 uses geometric functions. Both of these indexes provide a more balanced view of the complexity of the text. In future, the working of the index can be further explored using more data from multilingual texts (containing more than two languages). We can also find and compare the complexities of various corpora prior performing the tasks like part-of-speech tagging or sentiment analysis. The index can also be checked for mixed texts from other regions (like Spanish-English, Mandarin-English, etc.). In future, another challenging work would be to modify the index to account for complexity caused due to intra-word mixing.

[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/

[^2]: http://fire.irsi.res.in/fire/2015/home

[^3]: http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/icon2015/


abstract: In present technological era, healthcare providers generate huge amount of clinical data on daily basis. Generated clinical data is stored digitally in the form of Electronic Health Records (EHR) as a central data repository of hospitals. Data contained in EHR is not only used for the patients' primary care but also for various secondary purposes such as clinical research, automated disease surveillance and clinical audits for quality enhancement. Using EHR data for secondary purposes without consent or in some cases even with consent creates privacy issues for individuals. Secondly, EHR data is also made accessible to various stake holders including different government agencies at various geographical sites through wired or wireless networks. Sharing of EHR across multiples agencies makes it vulnerable to cyber attacks and also makes it difficult to implement strict privacy laws as in some cases data is shared with organization that is governed by specific regional law. Privacy of an individual could be severely affected when their sensitive private information contained in EHR is leaked or exposed to public. Data leak can cause financial losses or an individuals may encounter social boycott if their medical condition is exposed in public. To protect patients personal data from such threats, there exists different privacy regulations such as General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and My Health Record (MHR). However, continually evolving state-of-the-art techniques in machine learning, data analytics and hacking are making it even more difficult to completely protect individual's / patient's privacy. In this article, we have systematically examined various secondary uses of EHR with the aim to highlight how these secondary uses effect patients' privacy. Secondly, we have critically analyzed GDPR and highlighted possible areas of improvement, considering escalating use of technology and different secondary uses of EHR.
address: Faculty of IT, Barrett Hodgson University, Karachi, Pakistan; LIRIS, Universitè de Lyon, France
author: Shahid Munir Shah; Rizwan Ahmed Khan
title: Secondary Use of Electronic Health Record: Opportunities and Challenges

# Introduction

Clinical data is generated in the form of ongoing patient diagnostic services. These services usually take place in hospitals, clinics or laboratories through different clinical trials (via medical imaging or doctors prescriptions) or through wireless body area network using wearable sensors . All of these sources produce huge amount of clinical data world wide and its volume is experiencing an exponential growth. It is estimated that clinical data will swell up to 2314 Exabytes by 2020 from a figure of 153 Exabytes in 2013 with an annual growth rate of 48 percent .

In most of the countries (especially developing countries), data generated during routine clinical practices is stored manually in the form of paper based medical records. This procedure is adopted by the medical practitioners because of ease of handling, lack of understanding or for the purpose of treating more patients in less time. However, this method of storing patient's medical information is not useful for the patients and does not guarantee accurate and timely deliverance of healthcare services.

Some other problems associated with manual recording of clinical / medical data are:

1.  Paper based medical records can easily be altered or can be lost and may cause sever consequences.

2.  Physicians / clinicians can prescribe wrong medications (due to alteration of paper based medical records) or cannot advice right medications during follow up visits without properly knowing past medical records of patients.

3.  It is not practical for a person to carry a huge bunch of paper based past medical records during follow up visits or to describe complete medical history to a physician / clinician in case of change of physician or hospital.

4.  Reviewing and analyzing paper based records poses cumbersome task for new physicians or medical staff when patients change their physicians or hospital.

To avoid all of the above described difficulties, automated / electronic online patient information system through which patients' complete medical record is made available to healthcare professionals is required. Such electronic system also serves the purpose of storing patients data for longer time without any alterations and makes it accessible through different locations to support quick decision making processes .

Healthcare organizations are now adopting techniques to digitize medical records to overcome challenges (described above) faced by them or by patients while using paper based medical records . With the new technique, patients' clinical data is now stored as Electronic Health Records (EHR). EHR are the patients' computerized health records that contain patients' complete information along with their medical history in a format (refer Figure ) that can be easily shared among different health care providers or can be accessed by them through different linked locations when required .

Adoption of EHR provide range of benefits over the traditional paper based medical record systems. For Example:

1.  EHR are capable of storing structured, coded and electronic patient data all together to form a complete history of patient's health .

2.  Electronic data saved as EHR makes a Decision Support System (DSS) for monitoring health outputs to improve health care quality , where DSS is a tool, usually software based tool, that supports decision making by providing automated analysis of data .

3.  EHR system acts as a central database of information for patient documentation and billing, maintaining quality, and supporting patient related sensitive decisions .

4.  Data saved in EHRs can be accessed through multiple locations simultaneously and also can be shared with different partner organizations conveniently. Thus, making data accessible to the concerned physicians across multiple sites to better provide healthcare services.

5.  EHR reduce probability of errors related to medical data analysis as it stores complete medical records and thus lowers overall healthcare cost .

With all the above mentioned benefits of using EHR, certain risks factors are also associated with it. The most important issue is the data security and patient's privacy. In case, if EHR data is leaked or theft from the database, it can be misused (by altering dosage of drugs or treatment procedure etc.) and may cause severe complications or even leads to the patient's death . It is therefore utmost important to protect patient's information in central database from unauthorized wrong hands. Patient's information may also be theft while it is in transmission to the other linked services over the network.

Information contained in EHR is also used for different secondary purposes (other than patient personal care) such as clinical research, health promotions, clinical audit and clinical governance, national screening and preventive campaigns, audits against national standards, national statistics, planning future services, and resource allocations etc. (refer Section for discussion on secondary uses of EHR). For all such uses, patients may not be willing to share their information because often patient share their private health data for their personal care and not for the other / secondary uses. Using patient sensitive information for different secondary purposes without their consent seriously effects their privacy.

To safe guard patient privacy or personal data, there exist privacy standards in different regions of the world such as General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe , Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States (US) and My Health Record (MHR) in Australia . These standards provide legislation to protect personal data but with fast paced advancement in data analytics and artificial intelligence poses new challenges for such standards.

Our contributions in this article are following:

1.  In this study we described various secondary uses of EHR with the aim to highlight how these secondary uses effect patients' privacy, refer Section for discussion on secondary uses of EHR.

2.  In this article we have discussed various issues associated with secondary use of EHR, refer Section . Referred section also elaborates on security and privacy issues of using EHR data (Section ).

3.  This article systematically analyzed GDPR (recent privacy standard to protect European citizens data) regulation and enlisted its challenges of ensuring that EHR data to be used only for the purpose agreed upon by the patient, refer Section .

Our contributions in this article are oriented toward understanding ethical concerns when dealing with personal data in the era of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Research domain of our contributions (described above) needs more collaborative efforts by research community working in the domain of medicine, computing and law to achieve better insight. Ethical issues arising due to fast proliferation of AI-assisted technologies will raise various serious concerns, specially related to privacy of individuals. Due to complex nature of this interdisciplinary research domain it is hard to find literature on the topic and thus, our article is novel as it systematically analyzes uses of sensitive EHR data which, if violated, creates many privacy and ethical concerns.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section describes EHR along with their different standards. Section describe information sources of EHR. Section describes use of EHR in various secondary purposes. Section presents challenges of using EHR for secondary purposes. Section describes the systematic analysis of GDPR in context with the patients privacy and data security with respect to the secondary uses of EHR. Finally, in section conclusions is presented.

# Electronic Health Records (EHR): Data Sharing

EHR is a clinical data repository containing basic patient information such as patient's personal profile, his / her complete family history, laboratory reports, physicians and other medical staff notes etc. Along with this primary information, EHR also contain data form the other hospital information systems such as imaging data from radiology departments, patients genomics data from genetic departments or endoscopic or colonoscopic data from Gastroenterology departments etc. Figure illustrates the most important data elements included in the EHR.

EHR also provide functionality of generating reminders for routine screenings and disease reporting, generating graphical trends against various parameters such as blood pressure monitoring, heart beat monitoring, blood glucose level monitoring etc. The same is also shown in Figure . Such reporting is highly beneficial for patients health and safety especially when patients are in critical condition and their strict monitoring is required.

Conceptually EHR system can be divided into two basic parts . Creation part and the access part (refer Figure ). Creation part is based on the interaction of patient with the healthcare providers. This part explains, how the data from the patient is captured, how it is formatted according to the policies and standard and finally, how the formatted data is stored in an interoperable database. Access part is based on the access of the data stored in EHR by the different authorized users or organization. This part explains how confidential information from EHR can be securely accessed by the authorized users via user friendly interfaces.

## EHR standards

For the effective use of data contained in EHR, it must be shared through different linked locations such as clinics, hospitals, radiology departments, pharmacies, laboratories and patient homes (refer Figure )

Shared data at multiple locations ensures patients solitary care by identifying their basic needs in terms of care, safety, timeliness, and effective monitoring. It also helps medical staff (physician, nurses etc.) to take right actions based on patient conditions. The data usefulness can further be increased if the data contained in EHR is linked with different clinical decision support systems (CDSS). CDSS is automated medical data analysis tool that suggests next steps for treatment and generate alerts by predicting future conditions / trends by analyzing provided data . By this way, the physicians can take sensitive decisions quickly and effectively .

However, without any industry standard for information exchange, it is usually difficult to share and exchange EHR data across multiple sites. The same difficulty was faced by the healthcare organizations to communicate EHR data with each other and with different decisions support systems when there was no industry standard available for health information exchange. It was the main reason behind the slow adoption of EHR system in healthcare organizations even if their adoption was highly beneficial for them .

### Health Level Seven (HL7) standard

The Health Level Seven (HL7) organization was established in US in March 1987 to develop consistent common standards for Hospital Information System (HIS) . Afterwords this organization defined HL7-Clinical Document Architecture (HL7 CDA) as EHR messaging standard for easy integration, interchange, sharing and retrieval of information across different clinical information systems. The HL7 standard allows different healthcare organization to share and exchange patient information via encoded data exchange. It provides a common syntax of information for different clinical information systems to share information (contained in EHR) conveniently .

The HL7 CDA Framework 1.0 release, became an American National Standards Institute (ANSI) approved HL7 standard in November 2000 . After release of first version, version 2 and version 3 releases were also made available with some new standards and modifications . HL7 CDA is a markup for specifying composition and semantics of data ingredients of EHR such as a discharge report, admission summary, progress and procedure reports and to exchange them with various stakeholders. It is an absolute object document that may hold clinical data in various formats such as text, image, sound, or other multimedia content. Extensible Markup Language (XML) is used to encode the HL7 CDA clinical documents, which then can be exchanged in form of HL7 messages or using other transport solutions.

An HL7 CDA message consists of a header and a body. Header contains information regarding patient, source (provider) and the authentication of the message. On the other hand, the body of the message includes organized clinical reports i.e. lab, radiology, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT) scan, ultrasound etc.

### Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)

In order to improve inter interoperability and exchange of information, HL7 released different version time to time. In 1988, HL7 version 2 was released to enhance and streamline information exchange mechanisms / procedures, that can be used by different departments across hospitals . However, different limitations were exposed in this version such as difficult implementation process, having number of optional segments and above all lack of proper representation that is capable enough to identify techniques for exchanging messages and interfaces . To overcome the shortcomings of version 2, version 3 was developed in the year 1995 . Although, HL7 version 3 resolved much of the problems of previous version, it could not resolve the incompatibility issue raised because of variety of sub versions . In order to further improve HL7 standards, another novel interoperability standard i.e. Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) was initiated in the year 2011 by HL7 organization. FHIR standards are very simple to adapt, possess scalability and are robust in nature. These standards have potential capabilities of supporting work flows in small devices like mobile phones

# Electronic health record information sources

Adoption of EHR is beneficial both for patients, physicians and healthcare providers. It improves overall healthcare quality, omits paperwork, reduce medical errors and increase work efficiency as well as reduce overall healthcare cost .

Beside patients personal care, EHR data is also used for different secondary purposes(refer section fro secondary uses of EHR). However, functionality of EHR data for secondary uses has been limited because of non uniform data components across EHR. Non uniformity in data elements exists because of the fact that during daily clinical practices, EHR data is often recorded in free text and unstructured format. Therefore, EHR contains structured and unstructured sets of information. Figure elaborates more on the structured and unstructured data components of EHR. As shown in Figure , structured data includes laboratory results, vital signs, prescriptions, medications and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes whereas, unstructured data includes narrative information (free text) such as images and graphics, radiology reports, visit notes, discharge summary, chief complaint etc.

Figure depicts that the major portion of EHR data is consisted of unstructured elements. Such data elements are not represented in any standard coding scheme such as ICD codes, therefore, their retrieval, reporting and aggregation is not easy like structured data using commonly available database tools . It is therefore required to converted unstructured data elements into structured data in order to make it equally useful for secondary uses.

One of the method to convert unstructured data into structured data is manually reviewing EHR by the experts using text charts or data abstraction methods . However, these methods are time consuming and not reliable to capture all the structured information. Furthermore, it is beyond the capacity of human being to review clinical data of EHR in large volume. Natural language processing (NLP) has been found a great help for the researchers to extract structured clinical data from unstructured data elements . It is an artificial intelligence domain of computer science that uses computers to manipulate unstructured data such as narrative text in form of clinical notes or speech data .

Mostly, NLP uses statistical (probabilistic) Machine Learning (ML) models to derive language data from large volume of free text data. These models use text data to identify common patterns and associations in the data ṄLP based ML models give meanings to words and phrases in text and converts unstructured data elements of EHR into structured codes. In short, NLP captures unstructured data elements of EHR, analyze the data elements with respect to their grammatical structures, obtain meanings from grammatical structures, and finally summerizes information to make it useful.

# Secondary uses of EHR

One of the contribution of this study, as described above, is systematic analysis of various secondary uses of EHR data with the aim to highlight how these secondary uses effect patient's privacy. This section discusses different popular secondary uses of EHR data. Section elaborates on challenges associated with the secondary use of EHR data while, Section focuses on privacy and security challenges of EHR data.

## Clinical Research

The basic purpose of clinical research is to use EHR for design and execution of clinical trials for new medicines . Health related issues are directly proportional to the population. Currently, healthcare organizations, hospitals, laboratories are facing shortage of trained medical staff due to various reasons. One of the possible solution to tackle different medical ailments is to discover new drugs with better results or new techniques and robust strategies. All such activities require clinical research to be conducted. Thus, clinical research holds pivotal role in tackling some of the hard pressed medical issues.

| **Domains of clinical research** | **Examples** |
|:---|:---|
| Hypothesis Generation | To understand the people response on introducing new drugs. |
| Epidemiology | To find causes of disease in community of people. |
| Drug utilization | To figure out the use of medicines and to determine the frequency. |
| Patient recruitment | To raise the awareness of clinical trials. |
| Health Technology Assessments | Evaluating large number of research publications on a topic of interest and generating highly consolidated information for policy makers and health care providers |
| Comparative Effectiveness | Obtaining real world evidences from the analysis of real world data generated through routine clinical practices to help decision makers for making effective decisions. |
| Pragmatic Trails | Observing patients' treatment and their outcomes in real world situations to provide on ground real information to the decision makers so that they can make effective decisions for the enhancement pf quality of care. |

Different Domains of Clinical Research

Some of the other areas where clinical research is required are:

1.  Prediction of diseases based on patients present data .

2.  Study of drug behaviors with different diseases or different patients i.e. study on antibiotics .

3.  Developing vaccines for the prevention of diseases before it attack .

Other than the areas mentioned above, there exists multiple domains (refer Table ) where clinical research is essential to overcome the existing problems of the medical world and to ensure high quality of healthcare delivery to the patients.

In the domain of clinical research, EHR is an essential part because it is a basic information source and a possible way of exchanging clinical information with different stakeholders. Based on this exchange of information, various health statistics are developed and decisions are made. For example, based on data collected word wide, World Health Organization (WHO) publishes various reports time to time for public awareness and for the authorities knowledge to understand the current trends and future needs related to particular diseases .

Table lists possible information sources available in EHR that can help in successfully carrying out clinical research in different domains.

|  |  |  |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Data Sources** | **Explanation** | **Possible areas of Clinical Research** |
|  |  |  |
| Demographics | It includes patient's basic information such as name, age, gender, date of birth, address, contact, allergies, past medical history and diagnosis | Data analysis, community based research, age related research, disease surveillance, and all other epidemiological human population studies. |
| Daily Habits (Risky Behaviors) | Using tobacco, alcohol, and other sedative drugs. | Cancer research, chronic drug usage implications on health, mental illness, psychological disorders. |
| Facts and Monitoring | Weight, height, blood pressure, blood sugar, heart beat. | Hypertension research, Body Mass Index (BMI) based research, diabetic research, early childhood growth studies and cognitive outcomes. |
| Laboratory Data | Complete Blood Count, Prothrombin Time, Basic Metabolic Panel, Comprehensive Metabolic Panel, Lipid Profile, Liver Functioning Test, Thyroid Stimulating Hormone, Hemoglobin A1C, Urinalysis, Microbiological Culture with antibiotic resistance tests and others | To investigate the origin of disease, study of communicable and non communicable diseases as well as blood disorders. |
| Various Encounters Data | Human population or, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, anxiety and obesity, allergies, reflux esophagitis, respiratory problems, depressive disorder, asthma, nail fungus, urinary tract kidney failure, migraine | Research of all non communicable diseases. |
| Special tests & Procedures | Appendectomy, Electrocardiogram, Biopsies, Angiographies, Therapies | Special investigative tests for the advance research on non communicable diseases identification and control. |
| Imaging | Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultra Sound, Computerized Axial Tomography, Positron Emission Tomography etc. | Cancer Research, identification and monitoring of Congenital anomalies diseases in unborn babies, bone fractures and tumors, can be used to monitor response of tumors to chemotherapy or radiations. |

Different information sources available in EHR that can help in carrying out clinical Research

Table shows that EHR contains enough information to carry out clinical research in different domains. Successful utilization of this information for research purpose requires development of new and emerging research infrastructures capable of exchanging information based on latest published standards. However, when data is shared across different healthcare organizations it raises different security and privacy concerns. These concerns are discussed in Section .

## Public Health Surveillance

Another secondary use of EHR is Public Health Surveillance (PHS). PHS is a process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting data related to a specific disease for administrating and assessing public health on the whole . PHS particularly investigates those diseases, which harm or may tends to harm a large population and grow in community like epidemic diseases. Its main functions include collection of facts about a particular disease, risk factors of its spread and interpretation and analysis of the collected facts for controlling the disease to prevent public from its severe effects. One of the example of PHS is the surveillance of Dengue outbreak in Pakistan that has been reported in . Dengue is a viral disease which causes high fever in patients and spreads in people because of the bite of a particular Aedes aegypti mosquito. Recently, it has affected around 40% population of the world. Pakistan is one of the most affected country from it. There are several other examples of PHS world wide like reported in .

As discussed above, PHS is a common practice word wide but mostly in third world countries it is performed using manual procedures . In these methods, data about disease for surveillance purpose is collected using traditional methods. For example, physicians prescription records are gathered either from patients or from hospitals and clinics or through public surveys , similarly data form other departments of the hospitals (laboratories, radiology departments, emergency departments etc) is also collected manually by visiting the logs of these departments' databases. The collected data is then cross communicated between public health staff and health protecting agencies via telephonic and fax communication networks. Collected data is stored on papers manually and manual procedure is used to analyze the stored data . This method of PHS is time consuming, requires large manpower and needs huge efforts to record, store and analyze the data. It is also not a reliable method as there are chances of errors due to manual handling of data. Inaccurate and uncertain outcomes are possible based on the collection and inspection of manually collected and stored data . Such traditional methods are not suitable for the confirmation of certain disease, understanding its severity, its transmission risks, and the spread of other linked diseases.

With more effective way, surveillance of diseases can be performed by actively monitoring patients EHR. As EHR are rich in variety of data, the summary generated by analyzed data is provided to public health agencies for prevention and control of diseases. Health surveillance by EHR provides the glance of health status of the community, which promotes the quality of healthcare. It tracks the key diseases, with more effective way than manual procedures. Use of EHR provides the opportunity to automate the PHS. It is an effective way of preventing outbreaks by discovering utmost danger cases irrespective of merely reacting to outbreaks . Figure elaborates the effectiveness of EHR based automated surveillance against the traditional manual surveillance systems.

During traditional surveillance, the most of the time is utilized on manual screenings and reviewing charts and less time is saved for the actual intervention. On the other hand automated PHS assisted by EHR data is time efficient in analyzing data. The same is shown in Figure .

Use of EHR for public health surveillance has proved to be effective in developed countries such as United Kingdom (UK), United States (US), France, Norway, Canada and Australia . In these countries, local health departments have diverted their manual surveillance system towards EHR based electronic surveillance system. This practice has advanced the functionality of PHS . Developing nations have also initiated adoption of EHRs for PHS to robustly analyze data and take actions, if required . Thus, it is an important need of the present day automated surveillance systems to use data from EHR. For example, Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response System (IDSRS) requires data to be obtained from patient medical records . It is therefore necessary for the hospitals and the other health related agencies to adapt EHR so that automated surveillance can be done effectively.

## Clinical audit and quality assurance

The aim of clinical audit is to enhance patient care via rigorous analysis of care provided against benchmark standards . Clinical audit is a systematic way of settling standards, analyzing data based on standards, performing actions to meet settled standards and executing proper monitoring to sustain the standards. Clinical audit is a cyclic process (refer Figure ) that contains different stages to be followed for the achievement of best practices in clinical practices.

Standards settled for the clinical audits require not only to be obeyed by the medical staff (doctors, nurses, midwives, therapists, etc.) but also by the healthcare organizations like hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, ambulatory surgical centers, autonomous laboratories, radiology units, collection units etc. Clinical audit focuses on broadly accepted methods to improve over all healthcare quality. For example, organizational development, information management and statistics evaluation are the key functions of clinical audits.

The role of EHR is very important in clinical audits as it provides detailed and accurate information to the auditors. Using EHR for clinical audits gives convenience to the auditors to perform the clinical audits as compared to use of traditional clinical data for audit . Figure shows that the data collection and data analysis are the important parts of the clinical audit. In order to perform quality clinical audits, the clinical data must be easily available as well as the available data must be reliable to perform clinical audit. EHR conveniently provide data to the auditors from multiple access points to perform clinical audits to better provide the quality of the care to the patients.

# Challenges associated with secondary use of EHRs

Primarily, EHR data is collected for patient's individual care and administrative billing purposes. Using this data for different secondary purposes (as elaborated in Section ) is always challenging . It is because priorities and settings of primary and secondary uses are different. The quality of data collected for the primary purpose cannot be same as the quality of data collected for secondary uses. For example, data collected for clinical research needs much more care and attention during collection than the data gathered during routine clinical practices in the form of EHR. The quality of collected clinical data is a serious concern of the researchers. Due to this reason, with respect to reuse of clinical data, the authors of suggested that the data must be used for its primary purpose only.

Following are different factors of concern that affect the quality of clinical data collected through EHR.

## Correctness

Correctness refers to the accuracy of the collected data that is directly linked with its initial documentation (how the data was collected, recorded and stored). EHR data is collected through routine clinical practices during which the clinicians priority is to collect the patients data according to their own point of interest and according to different administrative needs but not according to their various secondary uses (refer Section ). The chances of errors are obvious in this case. According to the study presented in , data accuracy collected through EHR ranges between 44% to 100%.

Errors in EHR may lead to different outcomes, if their data is used for various secondary purposes. Errors include:

1.  Inaccurate predictions by clinical researchers

2.  Degradation in health standards and statistics as data analyzed was error prone.

3.  False health surveillance results that may lead to unforeseen medical emergency.

Improvement in accuracy of EHR is essential to make it equally beneficial for primary as well as secondary uses.

##  Incompleteness

Another factor that effects quality of clinical data is related to the completeness of the EHR. usually, EHR do not contain complete patient history. It is because patients do not always trust single healthcare organization and may visit several such organization to get sense of satisfaction. Study conducted in showed that out of 1.1 million adult patients, 31% visited two or more hospitals, whereas, one percent patients visited five or more hospitals for acute care during five year period of their study.

Patients also miss follow up visits suggested by the physicians or sometime due to the perfunctory of the concerned medical staff (who records patient related data), incomplete records are stored in EHR. A Study was conducted at Columbia University on 3068 pancreatic cancer patients out of which only 48% patients had complete pathology records, while, the rest had incomplete records about the disease .

EHR data is also considered incomplete for secondary uses because of the data "locked-up" condition. Locked-up condition means records have details regarding patient but it is not present in the coded portion of the record or in other words data present in EHR is structured and unstructured (already described in Section ). Structured data is in the format that can be easily processed by the computers. On the other hand unstructured data mostly requires Natural Language Processing (for hand written prescriptions) technique to be applied to make it structured (detail is provided in Section ) and processable by computers .

## Inconsistency

EHR data is handled by various individuals and at different locations. Multiple persons are involved in entering, storing and processing the data, therefore, data contains several definitions. Most of the data is present without mentioning proper units as units are often remembered by the medical staff and they can understand language written by each other. On the other hand for the non concerned person (who want to use the data for secondary purpose), it may be highly difficult to interpret the data without specified units. Involvement of different individuals in preparation and processing of EHR leads to an inconsistent form of data. It means, data present in EHR is not uniform. In such non uniform data, it is often difficult to relate assessments of different practitioners (because the assessment of different clinicians is often different). Secondly, data inconsistency also arises due to the fact that the data is collected with different tools at different locations, which may be time varying (data coding regulations and system abilities may change with time) . Inconsistent data may lead to erroneous data analysis and wrong results. Therefore, such inconsistent data is not useful for secondary use.

## Security and privacy challenges

EHR based clinical data provides many advantages over manual paper based medical records. It is cost effective, improves overall healthcare quality and above all can be easily accessed through different linked locations. All such advantages motivate health providing agencies and medical practitioners to adopt EHR based system. However, adoption of EHR and its data processing introduces several privacy and security issues. Especially, when this data is used for secondary purposes (refer Section for discussion on secondary uses of EHR). In the next subsections, security and privacy challenges related to secondary uses of EHR have been separately discussed.

### Security challenges

EHR contains patients personal and highly confidential data in the form of physicians' personal notes, neuroimaging data , X-rays, ultrasounds as well as lab reports. This data may include lab results of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases , mental disorders , personality disorders , contagious diseases as well as doctors sensitive comments about patient mental illness or personality disorders etc. All such data is stored in hospital's local database (each hospital may have its own local electronic database), which is connected across other hospitals or health providers databases via internet or wireless connections for sharing purposes. Transfer of such confidential data over the internet creates several security risks. It provides a chance to hackers and other harmful attackers to access the data and use it for their own purpose and to effect large number of patients . In case of patients monitored at home, the data from patients is collected through a distributed network of sensors. Securing such data is another big challenge because there are greater chances of spying and skimming .

With the passage of time healthcare technologies are extending and new technologies are being introduced to provide instant help to the patients and to enhance healthcare quality. For example, different smart devices monitor health (with the general purpose devices or wearable sensors) and prescribe medications as well as provide telemedicine technology for delivering remote care . Patients now can easily access healthcare facilities by integrating their mobile phones with telemedicine and telehealth services with the help of simple mobile applications . As the technology in the healthcare is continually evolving, its inter connectivity is also evolving. With the help of interconnected network, patients information is made broadly available to the relevant organizations and staff to provide quality healthcare. Exchange of patient information over the large inter connected network is beneficial in many ways but has increased existing security risks.

Cyber security is a technology that safeguards computer networks and information contained in them from different cyber attacks . In case of healthcare data, cyber security technology needs to be robust and strong as the healthcare sector presents lucrative avenue to cyber criminals to attack and get hold of very sensitive data to gain large financial benefits. Unfortunately, the results from study conducted by Kruse et al. concluded after analyzing data from thirty one (31) articles that the healthcare industry lags behinds in security as compared to the organizations working in other domains i.e. education, business sector, entertainment etc.

The prime reason for criminals to target healthcare data is to get financial gain. Criminals sell valuable data taken from EHR to the "darkweb" (darkweb refer to the content on the web that is not indexed by search engine and thus remains hidden from the general public) and achieve high financial gain. For the criminals, EHR data is more informative than credit cards because it contains various fixed identifiers and important financial information that is extremely worthy in black markets. Fixed identifiers of of EHR data can not be reset like the once in credit cards. Such identifiers in EHR are best information sources for the criminals to get easy access to the patients bank accounts for getting loans or to capture their passports and other important documents (property, insurance etc.) . For example, recent new article published story about theft of EHR data (20,000 record) from North Carolina-based Catawba Valley Medical Center. Stolen data contained patient names, dates of birth, medical data, health insurance information and social security numbers .

It is worth mentioning here to explain that the security of the healthcare data is not only today's concern rather it was the concern before the emergence of the EHR . Data security was well studied before the EHR came into existence (paper based patients records were needed to be safeguarded within the premises of a hospital and not on large scales) but with the adoption of EHR multiple gateways opened for accessing patients' information remotely. Furthermore, The patients EHR contains more detailed information all together in a single source as compared to the previous paper based medical records, which were distributed among different departments of the hospitals. With the adoption of EHR it is now easy for the criminals to attack millions of people at a time and to stole their valuable information (because EHR are interconnected with numerous networks. In case of paper based records it was not possible to stole millions of patients records at a time).

In short, adoption of EHR not only provided the range of benefits but also introduced potential risks of cyber attacks. Healthcare organizations spend more on increasing their integration but do not spend much on their system protection. In order to gain patients trust and to give them satisfaction regarding their data safety, the healthcare providers have to think about developing robust practical standards and solutions with particular healthcare / EHR needs.

### Privacy challenges

Privacy is defined as "right to be left alone" or to keep away from public domain . United nations general assembly (UNGA) declared privacy as a fundamental human right in its universal declaration of human rights. However, in this digital era the term privacy has become subjective and is interpreted and implemented differently by each state or country . Such ambiguities are sometimes exploited for different reasons, for example EHR data is used to gain financial benefits or for different secondary purposes, refer Section for discussion on secondary uses of EHR.

As mentioned above, EHR data contains several security risks especially when the information contained in them is shared with different stakeholders over the interconnected networks. Other than security issues, there are certain privacy concerns linked with exchange and sharing of EHR data. These privacy concerns are usually raised due to the fact that when the patients data (which was recorded for the purpose of patient individual care) is being shared or linked without consent or knowledge of particular individual. Usually consent of an individual is necessary for sharing of data but ambiguity arises when different healthcare organizations have different perspective on question of "who owns the data?". Is data belongs to patient, his / her physician, health insurance organization, healthcare organization, social security agency or is it jointly owned by all ?

Breach of data can happen due to various reasons, refer Section , which has many ethical repercussions. For example, disclosing patient's sensitive private information such as sexually transmitted diseases or mental illness in the public domain can negatively impacts individual's reputation. In extreme cases such individuals can face social boycott as people start avoiding an individual if they knew that he / she has sexual transmitted disease like HIV, chlamydia etc . Secondly, person's status in the society is seriously affected if his / her mental illness is disclosed to the public . Another dimension to this issue is financial impact on individual's life as medical insurance companies usually calculates premium / cost of insurance based on medical history and life events. In such cases insurance companies can increase their premium .

The privacy of clinical data has been subject to a lot of research and it has been difficult to determine how much of the data belongs to the patient and how much of it may belong to healthcare organizations and whether the consent of the owner of data is needed, in case the data is to be used for the research purpose . Privacy of patients can be affected when his / her data is used for clinical research or secondary use, refer Section for discussion on secondary uses of EHR. For example, blood sample given by the patient is stored in a laboratory and after carrying out requested analysis the same sample is analyzed again for the purpose of clinical research. Even though the sample is returned back to the laboratory without any damage, still it violated data privacy because by this way the patient control over his / her data was lost .

In research conducted by Bovenberg and Almeida referred to a case of patients versus Myriad Genetics, a molecular diagnostic company. The case was about four US cancer patients who wanted to have full access to their genomic data. Myriad claimed that patients were provided with all the information that was necessary to be included in their reports and additional data was not part of the medical record set. Patients, however claimed that the additional data was acquired from their lab sample, hence they have the right over data and only they should decide what happens to their data.

In order to protect sensitive data many patients try to conceal their sensitive information. It is because of the lack of confidence on the system's security retaining their data. It also shows mistrust of patients' on medical staff (doctors, nurses and the others) because patients think that they might disclose their confidential information to public that may create embarrassment for them in society . Some events have happened in the past because of which patients have become more sensitive in disclosing their private information. For example, in 2013, one of the medical technician of a US hospital was found guilty in selling patients medical information . Similarly, a hospital in the US informed his 34000 patients that their medical information has been lost from their agent . Due to all such incidents, patient don't feel confident in disclosing their information even to the physicians. Hiding facts and information from the physicians and the medical staff can lead to treatment failure. Thus, such challenges may have severe consequences for patients, healthcare providers and even for the governments.

It is highly recommended from policy makers, leaders and related authorities to discuss privacy and security concerns of EHR data (database storage policies or its sharing policies and paradigms) and formulate policies to address these concerns. There are some existing policies, which need to be revised or reformulated according to the present day era, an era of data analytics, big data and artificial intelligence.

# General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and its challenges

In order to protect patients personal sensitive data from different security threats and privacy violations, in some regions of the world, data protection regulation have been enforced by the authorities. The most popular data protection regulations are General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) , Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and My Health Record (MHR) . In this study we have focused only on GDPR and have critically analyzed it in terms of how it protects patient privacy and enforces data security.

After years of discussions, drafting, negotiations and efforts, in April 2016 GDPR was passed by European Union. On 25 May 2018, the European Parliament and Council of the European Union both with their combined efforts enforced the GDPR 2016/679 . Since then, professionals, citizens and authorities across the Europe and beyond are strictly bound to the legal regimes imposed by GDPR. It is an exhaustive document of legislation that addresses challenges of data protection of personal data. The aim of GDPR is to control and improve handling and processing of personal data particularly of European citizens. It oversee every aspect of citizens personal data handling and has recommended to impose heavy penalties for non compliance that may include prosecution of any organization in the world that is found guilty of privacy breach or misusing European citizens data .

GDPR is not only beneficial for the citizens but also for the organizations as it gives citizens confidence to share their data with the organizations when required. It also boosts organizations business and help them in their smooth running without any hurdle of acquiring citizens data (without trust citizens usually do not share their data when required by the organizations, refer Section for discussion on mistrust between data provider and data handler). Even with all these obvious advantages, organizations in the past were rigid to adapt (at present they are forced to adapt) privacy regulations imposed by GDPR . This is due to the fact that enterprises and organizations were facing challenges in implementing these regulations . The organizations were already complying with the regulations imposed by the European Data Protection Directive (EDPD) of 1995 and were not prepared for the new changes or possibly there was a lack of awareness for the new requirements raised by the GDPR. Another issue with the implementation of GDPR was financial needs, human resource requirements as well as proper training of the employees to understand the GDPR regulations .

GDPR defines six main data protection principles (other data protection principles further clarify them or further enhance them) that organizations (healthcare organizations) have to comply with when processing European citizens personal data .

Each of these principle is briefly explained below with implications on EHR data.

1.  **Lawfulness, fairness and transparency** (Article 5(1)(a)): This article states that citizens personal data must be processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. Lawful processing of data is further defined in Article 6, which states that in order to process personal data lawfully, it is necessary for the data controllers to set out / obey one of the following conditions. In this section the term "data controller" is used multiple times and in the context of this study this term refers to healthcare organizations which records and stores/hold personal data.

    -   "The data subject must be given consent (Article 6(1)(a))".

    -   "Processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party (Article 6(1)(b))".

    -   "Processing is necessary for compliance with the law (Article 6(1)(c))".

    -   "Processing is necessary to protect vital interest of the data subject (Article 6(1)(d))".

    -   "Processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest (Article 6(1)(e)".

    -   "Processing is necessary for a legitimate interest of the controller or third party (Article 6(1)(f)".

    In order to process personal data lawfully, all the clauses of the Article 6 (mentioned above) are important to be followed by the data controllers but the most pertinent clause of the article 6 in the context of EHR data is 6(1)(a) that relates to the processing of personal data with the consent of the person whose data is being used. However, based on the employer-employee or physician-patient relationships, where one party (physician in our case) is in power and processes other party's personal data, consent is not a proper legal basis to be relayed upon . This is due to the fact that data protection regulation requires consent should be genuinely free without any pressure / intimidation. It can only be possible if the patients have freedom in giving their consent or not and have a choice to withdraw their consent at any point of time without any detriment as easy as they gave it.

2.  **Purpose limitations (Article 5(1)(b))**: Purpose limitations bounds organizations (healthcare organizations) and individuals to collect personal data only for a specific, explicit and legitimate purpose and the data must be used for achieving that purpose only. Data purpose must be clearly defined before its collection and it should not be further processed in a way that is incompatible with the original defined purpose(s).

3.  **Data minimization (Article 5(1)(c))**: In order to use personal data, it must be limited to its primary purpose only. It must not be collected more than its need.

4.  **Accuracy(Article 5(1)(d))**: In dealing with the citizens personal data it must be responsibly dealt for example, if the data needs updation and inaccurate or incomplete data elements need to be removed, all must be done with high accuracy.

5.  **Storage limitations (Article 5(1)(e))**: Storage limitations refer to the fact that personal data must be deleted after it has been used and no longer further needed. It means data should be collected with a proper predefined time-line and it must be removed after the the time-line is reached.

6.  **Integrity and Confidentiality (Article 5(1)(f))**: It is the entire responsibility of the individuals or organizations (who want to process citizens personal data) to ensure the safe processing of data and to protect it from unauthorized use. During processing, data must be safe from any accidental loss, damage or demolition and it must be protected against any unlawful use.

## Critical analysis of GDPR with reference to EHR data

If analyzed critically, clauses (b-f) of Article 5 have contradictory nature in the context of EHR data concepts. The regulations mentioned in these clauses (such as data minimization, purpose limitation) limits the quantity of data collection and enforce its deletion soon after the purpose has been achieved. On the other hand, healthcare organizations encourages collecting more and more amount of data and to save it for longer period of time for the purpose of detailed analysis, mining and predictions , as discussed in Section .

Article 25 further enhances the ideas presented in Article 5 by defining privacy by design i.e. "The controller must implement appropriate technical and organizational measures for ensuring that, by default, only personal data which are necessary for each specific purpose of the processing are processed". Although, this Article enhances protection of personal data by demanding privacy by design form the controllers but it is difficult to implement because of its broader definition and due to the requirement of additional implementation cost and resources. Furthermore, privacy by design can show rigid behavior with time (like the other embedded technical solutions) because of not updating its measures frequently .

It has already been described in this study (refer Section ) that the healthcare data is one of the most vulnerable data in terms of security threats, therefore needs special attention for protection during processing. Article 9 of GDPR defines the processing of such especial categories of data, which required additional protections in processing such as genetic data, biometric data, healthcare data etc. Article 9 imposes additional obligations and provides more restrictive legal basis for processing health related sensitive data. The recommendation of this article is to obtain explicit consent of collecting and processing sensitive personal data. Although, explicit consent of data processing is required in processing any type of personal data (Refer article 6(1)(a) mentioned above) but in case of processing healthcare data, obtaining consent is usually difficult, specially for secondary purpose, refer Section for secondary uses of EHR data. Obtaining explicit consent for every secondary use is a time consuming, costly as well as an exhausting process . There has been a great debate on obtaining specific consent in literature. The conclusive outcome of all such debates is to shift specific consent into a broader consent of data processing that covers range of its future uses (such as secondary uses of EHR) .

At present, most of the patients are not aware (or do not want to be aware) about what happens to their data once it has been taken from them and also they do not know about the data processing procedures undertaken by the healthcare providers. According to Spiekermann et al. , if the individuals knew about today's healthcare business model and how third parties use personal private data, they would be surprised and feel betrayed. Obviously, under such circumstances, obtaining broad consent is not logical.

Article 32 of GDPR defines security of processing of personal data. According to it, to process and maintain security of personal data pseudonymisation should be performed . Pseudonymisation is a technique to ensure that individual won't be identified through personal data (personal data includes direct and indirect identifiers that can identify a person for example, name , ID number, location, contact information (Article 4)) . The process is to replace main characteristic of an individual with randomly generated indicators. The information regarding identification must be stored separately . Even if pseudonymisation technique is applied, it is possible to re-identify individuals by combining different data sets . Re-identification pull downs the illusion of privacy policies, which are promised by technologists. Lawmakers should re-evaluate law and consider weakness of pseudonymisation .

Other than the regulations described above, one of the most controversial regulation is the "Right to be Forgotten" (Article 17). This article imposes obligation of erasure of one's personal data on the controllers. It gives right to the users to erase their data any time from all the available places from where they want as per their request. According to concept of healthcare data where decision support and predictive systems are being made by archiving the patients' personal data (consider case of public health surveillance or clinical research, refer Section ), this article create huge controversy because logically no more backups or archives of data would be applicable by the organizations.

# Conclusion

The objective of this research article is to provide overview of EHR and its various secondary uses, how such uses effect individuals privacy and whether existing privacy regulation i.e. GDPR overcome these privacy challenges. Article began with overview of EHR, its data sources that contribute in making EHR and advantages of using it. Then, different standards for sharing EHR data i.e. HL7 and FHIR are discussed. Secondly, thorough analysis of various secondary uses of EHR with the aim to highlight how these secondary uses effect patients' privacy is presented. In the last article critically examined GDPR and highlighted possible areas of improvement, considering escalating use of technology and different secondary uses of EHR.

Presented article outlined various secondary uses of EHR to give readers an idea that how effectively EHR data can be used in different domains such as clinical research, public health surveillance and clinical audits to provide effective, timely and quality healthcare facilities to the patients, refer Section . In order to use EHR data for secondary purposes more effectively, challenges associated with the secondary uses of EHR have also been described to make readers well aware of the EHR data challenges when using it for secondary purposes.

In the present technological era, adoption of EHR has positively impacted healthcare services. With the help of seamless data sharing an individual can avail instant healthcare services at his / her location of preference. However, with evolving technology, risks of data security and compromise of privacy have also been significantly increased. EHR data contains highly personal and sensitive information i.e. ID / social security number, bank details, family information and medical history. Unauthorized access to EHR information can have devastating financial and social impact on individual if such sensitive information is leaked in public sphere. In this article different ethical and privacy issues arising from EHR data leak are discussed with detail in Section . In the referred section, data security and patients privacy risks related to the secondary uses of EHR especially when EHR data is transmitted through network and shared & exchanged with multiple stake holders are critically studied.

There exists privacy regulations such as GDPR, HIPPA and MHR to protect patients privacy and data security when EHR data is used for secondary purposes and transferred & exchanged with multiple concerned through different linked locations. However, there is a need to critically examine such regulations to analyze them for calculating their effectiveness in terms of safeguarding personal data as per present era needs. There is also a need to highlight the challenges of such regulations to further improve their effectiveness in safeguarding personal data from the potential cyber attacks and to cope with the technological advancements of cyber attacks. Study presented in this article focused only on GDPR. GDPR's most relevant clauses (related to privacy and clinical data security) are studied in perspective of secondary use of EHR, refer Section . Our purpose is to highlight possible improvements areas in GDPR regulations to make it more effective in protecting privacy and data security and to make it robust against escalating AI-assisted techniques in data analytics and cyber attacks.


abstract: I review the role and meaning of the Anthropic Principle, particularly in its relevance to particle physics as that subject evolves. This is neither a technical paper nor a resource letter, but rather an easy introduction.

**The Anthropic (and Mis-) Principle revisited, Steven Weinberg in memoriam**

S. Deser

*Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125;
Physics Department, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454
`email@example.com`*

# Introduction

Recent tributes to Steven Weinberg, our greatest living — now alas gone — theoretical physicist, have emphasized his use of this idea, among so many others. He made it a mainstream physics notion, worthy of discussing in a wider context, if only because of (despite?) its somewhat pompous title. Indeed, one might flippantly dismiss it on the grounds that, like the Holy Roman Empire's name, it is neither Anthropic nor a Principle, but rather a tautology. But despite this perhaps misleading fact, it is shorthand for a particular web of observational data, neither a panacea nor an act of desperation. To summarize, the Principle states the seemingly obvious requirement that the laws of Nature must permit the existence of some sort of sentient life, therefore our chemistry and biology: Like any experimental datum, this one puts stringent limits on our choice of (effective low energy, if not final) laws and their various constants such as masses, charges, Planck's and Newton's, as necessary conditions for organic chemistry, say, to be possible. Thus the word Anthropic is too narrow —natural selection might well have evolved other forms of intelligence, as indeed it did until stumbling on us, and we might well not last long, either—but here we are and so must be accounted for! Also it provides a fascinating window on how our requirements change with time in the Wilsonian progression to higher energies. By the 1890s, organic chemistry was a flourishing autonomous discipline, but of course did not explain, but rather restated the Principle. Then the Bohr atom of 1915 gave it a microscopic basis; by 1926, Dirac could claim all of chemistry was subsumed by QM. The physics of, say, 1932, when the photon, electron and its neutrino, proton, neutron were in hand, as well as the nuclear models of the era could be said to provide a full basis. Indeed, Occam would be happy to stop here! But then came the modern standard model, which if anything, overshot the 1932 requirements, with its new particles, symmetries and confinement. Yet the principle is too tight in that it requires all the constants, such as masses, charges, etc., to be bounded, whereas we have no idea at all as to why they are what they are! The above microscopic constraints are only some necessary conditions. There are also cosmological ones \[1\]; there too, Weinberg has contributed significantly \[2\], especially to tight limits on the value of the Cosmological Constant. The existence of sun-like stars with satellites of appropriate orbits is too far outside our scope to be useful, though stellar formation and stability are nontrivially relevant, while planets and their orbits are too "accidental" to be of use. Indeed, new light has just now been shed \[3\] on our sun's origins and stability, a step forward. As for the word Principle, it is a bit too august — all physics is based on Principle in the sense of agreement with the observed world. Descartes's famous cry was already proto-Anthropic, though alas only sufficient, not necessary — as we know too well! In the late Fifties, Fred Hoyle and Willie Fowler explored the necessity of carbon energy levels (and iron's for the formation of the heavy elements). Note that I do NOT imply anything as silly as a pre-established harmony between our brains and Nature's laws.

# Details

That was the short version of a complicated, and now enormously studied, subject, one worthy of wider intellectual appreciation. It is also at the heart of how science progresses. We look for data experimental or observational — on which to base our models, as we modestly call our theories. This is not a tendentious process: it simply puts limits on their range. The Principle then is a name for one set of such data, namely and somewhat loosely, those that are required in order that our universe allows for our existence, which means more concretely two different sets: The first requires that the laws of gravity and matter make it possible for chemistry, in particular organic — involving the element carbon — to exist and evolve into biology via ever- more complicated molecular structures. The latter moves us into the second, very different arm, namely accidental, cosmological and galactic effects, such as the cosmological constant's value, formation and stability of stellar objects like our sun, ones that have its radiative properties and can live in that state for a long enough time before dying out or being involved in some galactic catastrophe, and even more fortuitously, to eject planets some of whose orbits permit the thermodynamic properties that make life possible, if not necessary. This latter is a very tall order indeed, as the vain search for exoplanets with these properties testifies. Not all necessary conditions can be fruitfully exploited! The main result here was to put fairly limits on the value of the cosmological constant.

Fortunately, to borrow a sentence from the law, de minimis non curat physics: We are neither interested in, nor capable of calculating, such contingent events, as long as they are not manifestly forbidden by our models. So, being opportunistic is what the scientific method reduces to — in this case finding any necessary conditions to explain what we observe, or discover upon experimentation guided by previous insights... and luck. The Principle's special place is that it seemingly introduces a human element into the game. Yes, but — really — no more than limitations from entirely inhuman data! As a final thought, however, the above apparently trivial solar butterfly effect is why we Anthropos are so rare, if not unique, in our universe. I call it the Mis-Anthropic Principle: optimal planets and their orbits are forbiddingly unlikely to occur! It no way invalidates the Principle's usefulness in bounding acceptable physical models; both are necessary.

# Summary

Science proceeds using any tools it can; the Anthropic Principle is an example summarizing a web of observed regularities, both cosmological and microscopic, that any physical models must have room for, but in a way that evolves with theoretical progress, as we have illustrated. Undoubtedly more such changes will appear in due time, perhaps an endless process!

# Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics, Award No. de-sc0011632.