Studies assessing mortality found no difference between those receiving AMS care and the care provided by their regular health care provider (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.51-1.85]; ARR, 1 fewer deaths per 1000 [95% CI, 19 fewer to 33 more per 1000]; very low certainty). Compared with the usual care provided to patients by their regular health care provider, enrollment in an AMS reduced the risk of developing PE (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.78]; ARR, 11 fewer episodes per 1000 [95% CI, 4 fewer to 15 fewer per 1000]; very low certainty) and DVT (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.78]; ARR, 14 fewer episodes per 1000 [95% CI, 6 fewer to 19 fewer per 1000]; very low certainty). Quality of life as measured by the EuroQoL change score from baseline to follow-up was the same in groups receiving care from AMSs and those receiving care from their regular health care Patients enrolled in AMS had higher TTR than patients cared for by their regular health care provider (MD, 3.51% higher [95% CI, 2.74% higher to 4.28% higher]; very low certainty). Harms and burden. AMS care possibly reduced the risk for major bleeding in patients that were at average risk for bleeding, but the estimate is imprecise, and the CI includes no effect (RR, 0.66 fewer to 1 more episodes per 1000]; very low certainty). Other EtD criteria and considerations. The panel esti- mated moderate resource requirements associated with AMS care, mainly secondary to personnel costs. 