Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Risk of getting an incorrect answer that participants are willing to accept according to type of evidence user and scenario

From: Trading certainty for speed - how much uncertainty are decisionmakers and guideline developers willing to accept when using rapid reviews: an international survey

Types of user of evidence Acceptable risk (%)
  Na Median p25 p75 p5 p95 Min Max
All participants (n = 325)
 All scenarios 945 10 5 15 1 30 0 50
 Clinical Treatment (Scenario 1) 313 10 5 15 1 30 0 50
 Public Health Intervention (Scenario 2) 320 10 5 15 1 30 0 50
 Clinical Prevention (Scenario 3) 312 6.5 5 10.5 1 30 0 50
Guideline developers (n = 94)
 All scenarios 275 6 5 10 1 25 0 50
 Clinical Treatment (Scenario 1) 91 5 5 10 1 20 1 38
 Public Health Intervention (Scenario 2) 94 10 5 15 1 25 0 50
 Clinical Prevention (Scenario 3) 90 5 5 10 1 25 1 42
Decisionmakersb (n = 182)
 All scenarios 527 10 5 15 1 34 0 50
 Clinical Treatment (Scenario 1) 175 10 5 15 1 30 0 50
 Public Health Intervention (Scenario 2) 177 10 5 18 1 40 0 50
 Clinical Prevention (Scenario 3) 175 10 5 15 0 40 0 50
Guideline developers and decisionmakersb (n = 49)
 All scenarios 143 6 5 10 1 25 0 50
 Clinical Treatment (Scenario 1) 47 8 5 15 1 30 0 50
 Public Health Intervention (Scenario 2) 49 5 5 10 1 25 0 41
 Clinical Prevention (Scenario 3) 47 5 2 10 0 25 0 50
  1. IQR interquartile range, Min Minimum, Max Maximum, N number of participants
  2. p5 = 5th percentile, p25 = 25th percentile, p75 = 75th percentile, p95 = 95th percentile
  3. aNumber of responses; participants had the option to not answer individual scenarios
  4. bIncluding health policy decisionmaker, decisionmaker regulatory agency, decisionmaker health insurance company, hospital administrator and other types of evidence users. Participants could select more than one option