The Importance of Being FAIR and FAST - The Clinical Epidemiology and Study Platform of the German Network University Medicine (NUKLEUS).

The COVID-19 pandemic has urged the need to set up, conduct and analyze high-quality epidemiological studies within a very short time-scale to provide timely evidence on influential factors on the pandemic, e.g. COVID-19 severity and disease course. The comprehensive research infrastructure developed to run the German National Pandemic Cohort Network within the Network University Medicine is now maintained within a generic clinical epidemiology and study platform NUKLEUS. It is operated and subsequently extended to allow efficient joint planning, execution and evaluation of clinical and clinical-epidemiological studies. We aim to provide high-quality biomedical data and biospecimens and make its results widely available to the scientific community by implementing findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability - i.e. following the FAIR guiding principles. Thus, NUKLEUS might serve as role model for FAIR and fast implementation of clinical epidemiological studies within the setting of University Medical Centers and beyond.

Statistical biases due to anonymization evaluated in an open clinical dataset from COVID-19 patients.

Anonymization has the potential to foster the sharing of medical data. State-of-the-art methods use mathematical models to modify data to reduce privacy risks. However, the degree of protection must be balanced against the impact on statistical properties. We studied an extreme case of this trade-off: the statistical validity of an open medical dataset based on the German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON), which was prepared for publication using a strong anonymization procedure. Descriptive statistics and results of regression analyses were compared before and after anonymization of multiple variants of the original dataset. Despite significant differences in value distributions, the statistical bias was found to be small in all cases. In the regression analyses, the median absolute deviations of the estimated adjusted odds ratios for different sample sizes ranged from 0.01 [minimum = 0, maximum = 0.58] to 0.52 [minimum = 0.25, maximum = 0.91]. Disproportionate impact on the statistical properties of data is a common argument against the use of anonymization. Our analysis demonstrates that anonymization can actually preserve validity of statistical results in relatively low-dimensional data.