<div dir="ltr">I suspect that there is a misunderstanding regarding the purpose of the NHS number. It is not expected to provide anonymity or privacy.<div><br></div><div>In a small population a small amount of information may be sufficient to identify somebody uniquely. For example, within a university department name and date of birth is usually sufficient, but within the area of a health authority it might not be. Similarly, name and address of a student together are probably unique, but in a doctors' surgery records name and address of a patient may not be sufficient to identify that patient because children often share their name with a parent.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The NHS number is intended to resolve such ambiguity. For that reason any records that contain the NHS number cannot be described as anonymised.</div><div><br></div><div>Note: any identifier that is cross-referenceable to a name by the data controller satisfies clause (b) of the definition of personal data (Data Protection Act 1998, section 1).</div>
<div><br></div><div>I recently advised a major NHS department. Its anonymisation processes, e.g. for statistical reporting, required the complete removal of NHS numbers. However, the NHS number itself is not considered sensitive - most NHS staff can look up a patient's name and address using the number as the index.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Mark</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 11 February 2014 01:49, Adrian Midgley <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:amidgley@gmail.com" target="_blank">amidgley@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">It seems to be an article of faith, or something repeated often down a hierarchy, that the NHS number is anonymous.<div>
<br></div><div>So the expectation I've observed is that the anonymous records will have an identifier unique to the citizen or resident, and cross-referenceable to their name by many people for many legitimate purposes.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It is possible that I've failed to comprehend the full cleverness of the scheme of assurance of anonymity, and that there is more to it than assurance.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<div><div class="h5">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 8 February 2014 00:29, Roger Hayter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:roger@hayter.org" target="_blank">roger@hayter.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
According to a recent Parliamentary answer by Dan Poulter (Health Minister), if you opt out your data will not be sold or given to anyone outside the NHS in identifiable form. *But* it will still be centrally collected, stored and collated with new information, it will still be available for the police to investigate 'serious crime', and probably it will still be available for sale to commercial/research parties in pseudo-anonymised form. You can make your own assumptions from known law and practice about GCHQ. There was a rumour that the pseudo-anonymised stuff would *include* NHS number, but this is so silly it may be disinformation.<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
<br>
Roger Hayter<br>
</font></span><div><div><br>
<br>
On 7 Feb 2014, at 18:25, Peter Tomlinson <<a href="mailto:pwt@iosis.co.uk" target="_blank">pwt@iosis.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> A leaflet came through my letterbox this week (the same day that I went off to one of those NHS independent contractor minor procedure units [1] to have a stubborn molar removed by their dental surgeon - he is, of course, not a white anglo saxon protestant (or catholic or..), but likely from Egypt and did a brilliant job, as did the rest of the team).<br>
><br>
> NHS is the badge of the leaflet, 'Better information means better care' is the banner. It refers me to:<br>
><br>
> - NHS Choices web site<br>
><br>
> - 'staff at your GP practice'<br>
><br>
> - <a href="tel:0300%20456%203531" value="+443004563531" target="_blank">0300 456 3531</a> (nothing about any call costs)<br>
><br>
> - 'More details about how we look after confidential information and how it may be used can be found on the website at <a href="http://www.hscic.gov.uk/patientconf" target="_blank">www.hscic.gov.uk/patientconf</a>'<br>
><br>
> It asks 'Do I need to do anything?. The answer is nothing if I'm happy for my infomation to be shared. And the vital but naked statement "And you can change your mind at any time".<br>
><br>
> So its opt in by default.<br>
><br>
> Peter<br>
><br>
> [1] 'minor' indeed - in the waiting room I found their poster for their fast track hip replacement jobs.<br>
><br>
> On 07/02/2014 16:44, Ian Batten wrote:<br>
>> It seems to be coming from all angles, doesn't it?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br>Adrian Midgley <a href="http://www.defoam.net/" target="_blank">http://www.defoam.net/</a>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>