Table 3.

Implicit factors identified in the literature: frequency of mentions and impact in the HTA deliberative process.

CATEGORY	IMPLICIT FACTORS	FREQUENCY OF MENTIONS	IMPACT ON THE HTA DECISION-MAKING
ETHICS	Value judgments [6,14]	76	Fairness of resources allocation to health technologies may be compromised. May capture particular interests to the detriment of public interests, comoprimising equal access to good quality healthcare
	Bias [24]	34
	Equity [14]	12
	Equality [14]	4
	Intrisic values [14]	2
	Moral values [14]	2
	Interests [23]	2
	Implicit assumed desire [14]	2
	Vested interests [27]	2
	Values of knowledge [14]	1
	Ethical issues [6]	1
	Ethical implications [6]	1
	Fairness [14]	1
PSYCHOLOGY	Preferences [14]	16	Not mentioned
	Subjective [25]	13
	Training [25]	9
	Gut feeling [25]	6
	Opinion [25]	4
	Personal considerations [25]	2
	Personal values [22]	1
	Personality [22]	1
	Overconfidence in own judgment [25]	1
QUALIFICATION AND EXPERIENCE	Qualification [25]	5	Not mentioned
	Precedents for similar previous decisions [25]	1
	Previous decision-making mistakes [25]	1
	Experience in previous decision-making [25]	1
	Experience [14]	1
	Precedents for similar previous decisions [25]	1
	Experience in previous decision-making [25]	1
POLITICS & SOCIETY	Social values [22,27]	4	Not mentioned
	Political processes of the country [35]	1
	Political influences [25]	1
	Political pressures [24]	1
	Societal perceptions [27]	1
CULTURE	Cultural values [22]	1	Not mentioned
	Organizational culture [24]	1
FUNCTIONAL ROLE	Individual responsibility [14]	1	May impact the healthcare resource allocation
	Power of status [22]	1
DISEASE PERCEPTION	Disease severity [22]	1
	Burden of disease [14]	1