Redacting a provider summary means removing identifying detail from the note sent between clinicians under UK GDPR Art. 9 and DPA 2018. anonym.plus does it on your device. The reason for onward care stays; the patient is not named. Where the summary passes between two doctors, the GMC's Confidentiality: good practice in handling patient information (2017) sets a professional confidentiality duty for both, alongside UK GDPR Art. 9 and DPA 2018.
When this applies
An NHS Trust's single point of access (SPA) team wants to share a model provider letter with new staff. Names, dates, and both clinicians must be stripped before the example goes out.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Open the document in anonym.plus on your machine.
- Local OCR reads any scanned page.
- It flags patient and clinician names plus dates.
- Review each flag and keep the clinical reason.
- Replace each identifier with a label, or hide it.
- Save the clean copy. The source stays local.
What you need to provide
- The summary (PDF, DOCX, TXT, or scan).
- An operator: Replace, Redact, or Mask.
- Optional: a name map for re-linking.
Patient data entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Patient | PERSON | Sofia Lang → [PATIENT_1] |
| Referring clinician | PERSON | Dr Park → [STAFF_1] |
| Receiving service | ORGANIZATION | Maple Behavioural Health → [CLINIC] |
| Date | DATE_TIME | Referred 12/03/2026 → [DATE] |
| Phone | PHONE_NUMBER | +44 7911 100133 → [PHONE] |
| NHS number | NHS_NUMBER | NHS 471 201 2345 → [NHS_NO] |
Compliance achieved
- Removes identifiers under UK GDPR Art. 9 & DPA 2018.
- Meets the confidentiality duty in the GMC's Confidentiality: good practice in handling patient information (2017), which applies to both the referring and receiving doctor.
- Runs offline, so no cloud processor contract is required.
- Summaries are kept safe with AES-256-GCM.
- Assessed per ICO Anonymisation Code and UK GDPR Recital 26.
Anonymise behavioural referral summaries offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
The law expects no leftover clue that could re-identify the person. The tool clears named identifiers. A named provider plus a small area may still hint at identity, so review before sharing.
Frequently asked questions
Are both clinicians removed?
Yes. The sending and receiving clinicians named in the letter are identifiers in their own right, not just the patient. The tool flags each so the patient cannot be traced through the handover path between services.
Can I use this as a template?
Yes, once de-identified. With every identifier stripped and Art. 9 satisfied, the letter may train new SPA or CMHT staff safely on how a referral is written.
Does GMC guidance require more than the law does?
In places, yes. It expects doctors to treat patient confidentiality as a professional obligation tied to their registration, not just a legal one, and it specifically addresses sharing letters and summaries between colleagues. De-identifying a training example satisfies both the GMC standard and DPA 2018 at the same time.