Anonymising a safety assessment means removing identifying detail from the file under UK GDPR Art. 9 and DPA 2018. anonym.plus does it on your device. The findings stay readable; the person is not named. UK courts have long recognised, in cases such as W v Egdell, that a clinician's duty of confidence is not absolute where there is a real risk of serious harm to someone else — which is exactly why a de-identified copy used for protocol review must still remove any named third party at risk, not only the client.
When this applies
A trust's clinical governance team studies patterns across risk assessments, following a Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) case review, to improve protocols. The records name clients, dates, and a named third party, all of which must come out first.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Open the file in anonym.plus on your machine.
- Local OCR reads any scanned page.
- It flags names, dates, and any third party.
- Review each flag and keep the safety findings.
- Replace each identifier with a label, or black it out.
- Save the clean copy. The source stays local.
What you need to provide
- The assessment file (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 |
|---|---|---|
| Client | PERSON | Rosa Mejia → [CLIENT_1] |
| Assessed date | DATE_TIME | Assessed 09/04/2026 → [DATE] |
| Third party | PERSON | ex-partner Vic → [PARTY_1] |
| NHS number | NHS_NUMBER | NHS 388 120 2230 → [NHS_NO] |
| Phone | PHONE_NUMBER | +44 7700 900152 → [PHONE] |
| Record ID | MEDICAL_RECORD_NUMBER | MRN 38812 → [MRN] |
Compliance achieved
- Removes identifiers under UK GDPR Art. 9 & DPA 2018.
- Case law such as W v Egdell confirms that a named person at risk deserves the same protection as the client when a record is de-identified for review — the tool flags both.
- Runs offline, so no cloud processor contract is required.
- Forms are kept safe with AES-256-GCM.
- Assessed per ICO Anonymisation Code and UK GDPR Recital 26.
Anonymise behavioural risk assessments offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
A safety assessment often names a third party at the heart of the concern. The tool flags those names too. You still confirm no rare detail can re-identify either the client or that party.
Frequently asked questions
Are named third parties removed?
Yes. A safety assessment may name an ex-partner, family member, or other person the concern relates to. Each is an identifier, and the tool flags them so neither that person nor the client is exposed in a protocol-review copy.
Can I study patterns safely?
Yes. Once the forms are de-identified under UK GDPR Art. 9, they may support protocol review by a clinical governance team without further authorisation from the people named in them.
Does the Egdell principle mean I should disclose risk information instead of anonymising it?
No — that is a separate clinical and legal judgment for the professionals involved, not something this tool decides. Egdell is relevant here only because it shows why a named third party's identity in a risk record is legally significant and needs the same careful removal as the client's own name when the record is used for protocol review rather than an active safeguarding response.