Patient-history de-identification removes identifiers from the medical, social, and family sections of a record. Those last two sections carry the hardest problems. Family history describes inherited characteristics. That makes it genetic data under UK GDPR Art. 4(13), and special category under Art. 9(1). Social history lists occupation, locality, and habits. UK GDPR Art. 4(1) treats each of those as an identifier in its own right. anonym.plus runs locally and gives both sections extra attention.
When this applies
A full history is invaluable for teaching and research. It is also the densest source of indirect identifiers in the whole record. A named relative with a rare inherited condition identifies a family, not just a patient.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Load the file into anonym.plus on your device.
- It scans the medical, social, and family sections.
- Named relatives, occupations, and places get flagged as indirect identifiers.
- Swap them so the clinical story still flows.
- Save the clean history on your device.
What you need to provide
- The history file (DOCX, PDF, or EPR export).
- An operator (Replace keeps the story readable).
- Optional label map for family members.
Patient data entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | patient & relatives → [NAME] |
| Location | LOCATION | miner, Barnsley → [LOCATION] |
| Dates | DATE_TIME | smoker since 1998 → [DATE] |
| Relatives | PERSON | father, dx 2010 → [RELATIVE] |
| Record IDs | MEDICAL_RECORD_NUMBER | MRN → [MRN] |
| NHS Number | UK_NHS | NHS 943 476 5919 → [NHS_NO] |
Compliance achieved
- Family history describing inherited characteristics is genetic data under UK GDPR Art. 4(13) and special category under Art. 9(1).
- Occupation, town, and habits are identifiers in their own right under UK GDPR Art. 4(1) (economic, cultural, or social identity).
- Any DNA result in the file also sits under the Human Tissue Act 2004, whose s.45 makes non-consensual DNA analysis a criminal offence.
- Residual risk is judged with the ICO motivated-intruder test before UK GDPR Recital 26 can be relied on.
- Named relatives are separate data subjects, so their details come out with the patient's.
- Local-only — a highly sensitive file is never uploaded.
Anonymise patient histories offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
The social and family sections are the hardest to clear fully. A rare occupation in a small town can re-identify someone after every direct identifier is gone. So can a named relative's rare inherited condition. Genetic information also identifies relatives who never consented to anything. Review these sections and apply the ICO motivated-intruder test for unusual cases.
Frequently asked questions
Why are the social and family sections riskier?
Because they are built from exactly the material UK GDPR Art. 4(1) calls out. That means factors specific to a person's economic, cultural, and social identity. An occupation, a town, a household, and a relative's diagnosis can point to one individual. No name or number has to be present at all.
Is family history really genetic data?
Where it describes inherited characteristics, yes. UK GDPR Art. 4(13) defines genetic data as data on inherited or acquired genetic traits. Those traits give unique information about a person's health, and Art. 9(1) makes them special category. It also means the text concerns relatives who are not your patient.
Are relatives' details removed too?
Yes. A named relative in the history is a data subject in their own right, so their name, their diagnosis, and their age at diagnosis are all flagged and swapped. The clinical pattern — that a first-degree relative was affected early — can be preserved without naming anyone.