Table 2 Sources of information and how it was used by panels

Update of prior systematic review

Utility estimate

Nonfatal Intracranial Bleed (severe): 0.1 to 0.51

Nonfatal Intracranial Bleed (moderate): 0.29 to 0.77

Nonfatal Intracranial Bleed (mild): 0.47 to 0.94

Nonfatal Pulmonary Embolism: 0.63

Major Bleed: 0.44 to 0.84

“This result suggested intracranial bleed overall was 2 to 3 times worse than major bleed or pulmonary embolism.”

To help guideline panellists weigh the benefits (absolute reduction in pulmonary embolism) and harms (absolute increase in bleedings).

Systematic review

Non-utility estimate

For the guideline on management of breast lump and primary breast cancer, the systematic review identified one study reporting an additional year in life expectancy or 3% in survival rates were sufficient to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile by 68–84% of women.

To judge to what extent women are willing to accept the burden of adjuvant chemotherapy to benefit from a specific amount of increased survival

Systematic review

Qualitative finding

“Evidence from qualitative studies suggested women may fear screening and may have a high level of anxiety related to colposcopy or treatment.”

To suggest what are the views of local women on cervical cancer screening tests in relation to its psychological impact

Panel members (either physicians or patients)

Panellists experience

In some guideline topics, patient inputs corroborated the panel’s perception.

To serve as complementary sources in addition to the information from systematic review.