Data Masking Statistics 2024 – Everything You Need to Know

by

Are you looking to add Data Masking to your arsenal of tools? Maybe for your business or personal use only, whatever it is – it’s always a good idea to know more about the most important Data Masking statistics of 2024.

My team and I scanned the entire web and collected all the most useful Data Masking stats on this page. You don’t need to check any other resource on the web for any Data Masking statistics. All are here only 🙂

How much of an impact will Data Masking have on your day-to-day? or the day-to-day of your business? Should you invest in Data Masking? We will answer all your Data Masking related questions here.

Please read the page carefully and don’t miss any word. 🙂

On this page, you’ll learn about the following:

Best Data Masking Statistics

☰ Use “CTRL+F” to quickly find statistics. There are total 71 Data Masking Statistics on this page 🙂

Data Masking Latest Statistics

  • 10% then it is still a very meaningful data set in terms of the ranges of salaries that are paid to the recipients. [0]
  • Multiple layers of cloth with higher thread counts have demonstrated superior performance compared to single layers of cloth with lower thread counts, in some cases filtering nearly 50% of fine particles less than 1 micron.14, 18. [1]
  • A large, welldesigned clusterrandomized trial in Bangladesh in late 2020 found that surgical or cloth mask distribution, role modeling, and active mask promotion tripled mask use to 42.3% in intervention villages compared to 13.3% in comparison villages. [1]
  • In villages receiving mask interventions, symptomatic seroprevalence of SARSCoV 2 was reduced by approximately 9% relative to comparison villages. [1]
  • In villages randomized to receive surgical masks, symptomatic seroprevalence of SARSCoV 2 was significantly lower (relative reduction 11.1% overall). [1]
  • A study of an outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, an environment notable for congregate living quarters and close working environments, found that use of face coverings on board was associated with a 70% reduced risk of infection.38. [1]
  • Outbreaks were three and a half times more likely (adjusted odds ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 1.8 6.6). [1]
  • An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product.52. [1]
  • The study was too small (i.e., enrolled about 0.1% of the population). [1]
  • In villages receiving mask interventions, symptomatic seroprevalence of SARSCoV2 was reduced by approximately 9% (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 1.00). [1]
  • Masking reduced risk of infection by 70% . [1]
  • Mask wearing by index cases or Masking reduced risk of secondary infection by 79% (adjusted OR 0.21, 95% CI = 0.06–0.79). [1]
  • Always having used a mask reduced infection by 77% . [1]
  • 374,021 persons who completed webbased surveys Selfreported mask wearing in grocery stores and in the homes of family or friends 10% increase in mask wearing tripled the likelihood of stopping community transmission . [1]
  • Estimated daily decline in new diagnoses among HCW of 0.49%. [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing in public spaces Estimated daily decline in new diagnoses of 1.28 percentage points. [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing in public spaces Estimated case rate per 100,000 decreased by 0.08 in counties with mask mandates but increased by 0.11 in those without Lyu and Wehby 51. [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing in public Estimated overall initial daily decline in new diagnoses of 0.9%, grew to 2.0% at 21 days following mandates. [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing in public Estimated decline in weekly hospitalization rates by 5.6 percentage points for adults aged 18–64 years after mandate implementation, compared with growth rates during the 4 weeks preceding implementation of the mandate. [1]
  • 1,020 K–12 schools School mask policies Odds of a schoolassociated COVID 19 outbreak in schools without a mask requirement were 3.5 times higher than those in schools with an early mask requirement (OR = 3.5; 95% CI = 1.8–6.9). [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing indoors Estimated weekly 22% decline in new diagnoses following mask mandates. [1]
  • Mandatory mask wearing for employees in public businesses Nationally mandating face masks for employees early in the pandemic could have reduced weekly growth rate of cases and deaths by more than 10 percentage points in late April and 34% . [1]
  • 19–47%) fewer deaths nationally by end of May. [1]
  • 10% to all salaries in the set. [2]
  • Of the 8 states with at least 75% mask adherence, none reported a high COVID. [3]
  • States with the lowest levels of mask adherence were most likely to have high COVID 19 rates in the subsequent month, independent of mask policy or demographic factors. [3]
  • Mean COVID 19 rates for states with at least 75% mask adherence in the preceding month was 109.26 per 100,000 compared to 249.99 per 100,000 for those with less adherence. [3]
  • We calculated the average mask use percentage by month for April–September, 2020. [3]
  • We also identified states with average mask adherence ≥75% in a given month. [3]
  • Specifically, we created the following categories >15% non Hispanic Black, >15% Hispanic, median age >40 years, and population density. [3]
  • >200 people per square mile, which corresponded to 74.5%, 78.4%, 82.4%, and 78.4% of the distributions, respectively. [3]
  • Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals for high case rates in the subsequent month associated with average mask adherence. [3]
  • Models were unadjusted, adjusted for no mask policy , and adjusted for no mask policy in previous month, no stayhome order, >15% population non Hispanic Black, >15% population Hispanic, median age. [3]
  • Across these four months, the proportion of states with COVID rates in the high category were 19 (37%), 19 (37%), 20 (39%), and 32 (63%). [3]
  • Eight states were reported to have at least 75% mask adherence in any month between June and September ; none reported a high COVID 19 rate in the subsequent month. [3]
  • For mask adherence, the cut off values for the low and high quartiles were 31% and 46% in June, 53% and 72% in July, 55% and 71% in August, and 55% and 68% in September. [3]
  • When we looked at states with ≥75% mask adherence , we found none had experienced a high COVID 19 rate in the subsequent month. [3]
  • Mean COVID 19 rates for states with ≥75% mask adherence in the preceding month was 109.26 per 100,000 compared to 249.99 per 100,000 for those with less adherence. [3]
  • Among states and D.C. with no mask wearing policy, 50 to 73% had high COVID 19 rates in the subsequent month. [3]
  • In contrast, 25% or fewer states with a mask wearing policy had high COVID 19 rates, except in September when over half experienced high rates. [3]
  • Looking more closely at October when COVID19 rates increased across the US, we found average adherence was only 47% in September for the 11 states without a mask policy and high October COVID. [3]
  • In contrast, average adherence was 68% in the 15 states with lower COVID 19 rates in October and any mask policy in September. [3]
  • Of note, there were no states with ≥75% in September. [3]
  • Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for average mask adherence and mask policy for the general public are associated with high COVID 19 rates in the subsequent month. [3]
  • For every 1% increase in average adherence in June, the fully adjusted odds ratios for high COVID19 in July was 0.95, indicating a protective effect against high COVID. [3]
  • The strongest association was for mask adherence in September; for every 1% increase in average adherence, the odds of a high COVID 19 case rate decreased by 26%. [3]
  • Our observation that states with mask adherence by ≥75% of the population was associated with lower COVID 19 rates in the subsequent month suggests that states should strive to meet this threshold. [3]
  • The difference in mean COVID 19 rates between states with ≥75% and <75% mask adherence was 140 cases per 100,000. [3]
  • People at increased risk.https//www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019ncov/needextraprecautions/index.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019ncov%2Fneedextraprecautions%2Fpeopleatincreased risk.html, accessed December 28, 2020. [3]
  • According to 57 percent of French companies and 48 percent of German ones, masking personal data will accelerate IT and business processes that depend on access to secure data. [4]
  • Available to download in PNG, PDF, XLS format 33% off until Jun 30th. [4]
  • The most important statistics Share of companies that are worried about cyber threats in Denmark 2020 Future cybersecurity threats according to companies in Denmark. [4]
  • 73% 15% 12% 88% 2/213/4 67,678 77% 17% 7% 93% 1/242/4/22 43,393 83% 13% 4% 96% 12/27 1/7/22 56,788 87% 10% 3% 97%. [5]
  • 15% 8% 92% 6/146/25 50,756 84% 12% 4% 96% 5/17. [5]
  • 86% 11% 3% 97% 8/10 8/21 57,437 83% 13% 4% 96% 7/13. [5]
  • 4/19 4/30 53,978 91% 8% 1% 99%. [5]
  • 1/25 2/12* 66,673 92% 7% 1% 99%. [5]
  • 64% 13% 23% 77% 3/7. [5]
  • 88% 9% 2% 98% 1/11 1/22 111,785 87% 10% 3% 97%. [5]
  • 86% 11% 3% 97% 10/1910/30 75,999 82% 14% 4% 96% 9/21. [5]
  • 80% 14% 5% 95% 8/249/4 41,993 73% 18% 9% 91% 7/27 8/7 18,077 66% 22% 13% 87%. [5]
  • According to some estimates, 75% of Americans would like to communicate with their physicians via email and 60% would like to track their medical records electronically. [6]
  • A study by the US General Accounting Office reported that 61% of the data mining projects run by federal agencies used personal information, and 67% of the data mining projects from the private sectors involved personal information. [6]
  • A survey by Time/CNN revealed that 93% of the respondents believed organizations sharing personal data for secondary use should be required to gain permission from the individuals. [6]
  • According to Teltzrow and Kobsa , 82% of online users have refused to give personal information and 34% have lied when asked about their personal habits and preferences. [6]
  • Similarly, another survey found that only 2.5 million (< 1%). [6]
  • The RBID rate is very low at 0.36%. [6]
  • The MSPE value based on the masked data is only 1.39% higher than that on the original data. [6]
  • For the moderately masked data, we are able to obtain zero RBID and a 1.05% increase in MSPE, with a linkage count of only 25 records. [6]
  • Table 2Results of ExperimentsDataRecord LinkageCountRelative Bias inDistribution (%)Difference in RegressionMSPE (%). [6]
  • However, it is still likely that an intruder can discover the sensitive information of individuals in the k. [6]

I know you want to use Data Masking Software, thus we made this list of best Data Masking Software. We also wrote about how to learn Data Masking Software and how to install Data Masking Software. Recently we wrote how to uninstall Data Masking Software for newbie users. Don’t forgot to check latest Data Masking statistics of 2024.

Reference

  1. wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_masking.
  2. cdc – https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html.
  3. bmc – https://www.bmc.com/blogs/data-masking/.
  4. plos – https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249891.
  5. statista – https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005450/main-benefits-in-data-masking-in-europe/.
  6. mta – https://new.mta.info/safety-and-security/nyct-mask-compliance.
  7. nih – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3839961/.

How Useful is Data Masking

One of the primary benefits of data masking is its ability to ensure compliance with various data protection regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). By obscuring sensitive data like personally identifiable information (PII) and financial information, organizations can reduce the risk of unauthorized access and mitigate the potential for data breaches or non-compliance with data protection laws.

Furthermore, data masking helps to safeguard organizations from internal threats by limiting access to sensitive data to only those employees who require it to perform their jobs. By implementing data masking techniques, organizations can prevent unauthorized employees from viewing or accessing confidential information, thereby reducing the risk of insider threats and ensuring the confidentiality of sensitive data.

In addition to protecting sensitive data and ensuring compliance with regulations, data masking also plays a crucial role in facilitating data analytics and test environments. By masking sensitive data in development or test environments, organizations can provide realistic test scenarios without exposing sensitive information to unauthorized individuals. This allows organizations to conduct testing and analysis on realistic datasets while maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive information.

Data masking is also an essential tool for securing data during the process of data migration or replication. By masking data before migrating it to a new system or replicating it for backup purposes, organizations can ensure that sensitive information remains protected throughout the data transfer process. This is particularly important when transferring data between different systems or locations, as it helps to minimize the risk of data loss or unauthorized access during the migration process.

Overall, data masking is a critical component of any comprehensive data security strategy. By implementing data masking techniques, organizations can protect sensitive data, ensure compliance with data protection regulations, safeguard against internal threats, facilitate data analytics and test environments, and secure data during migration or replication. As the volume of data continues to increase and the risk of data breaches grows, data masking serves as a crucial tool in helping organizations mitigate the potential risks associated with storing and processing sensitive information.

In Conclusion

Be it Data Masking benefits statistics, Data Masking usage statistics, Data Masking productivity statistics, Data Masking adoption statistics, Data Masking roi statistics, Data Masking market statistics, statistics on use of Data Masking, Data Masking analytics statistics, statistics of companies that use Data Masking, statistics small businesses using Data Masking, top Data Masking systems usa statistics, Data Masking software market statistics, statistics dissatisfied with Data Masking, statistics of businesses using Data Masking, Data Masking key statistics, Data Masking systems statistics, nonprofit Data Masking statistics, Data Masking failure statistics, top Data Masking statistics, best Data Masking statistics, Data Masking statistics small business, Data Masking statistics 2024, Data Masking statistics 2021, Data Masking statistics 2024 you will find all from this page. 🙂

We tried our best to provide all the Data Masking statistics on this page. Please comment below and share your opinion if we missed any Data Masking statistics.

Leave a Comment