Table E1.

Relative weights of studies from a random‐effects meta‐analysis under various scenarios

id	Weights From LOCF	Weights From Scenario N1	Weights From Scenario N2
	Analysis	${\mathit{\delta }}_{\mathit{ij}}^{\mathbf{imp}}\sim \mathit{N}\left(\mathbf{0},{\mathbf{3}}^{\mathbf{2}}\right)$	${\mathit{\delta }}_{\mathit{ij}}^{\mathbf{imp}}\sim \mathit{N}\left(\mathbf{0},{\mathbf{5}}^{\mathbf{2}}\right)$
		${\mathit{\delta }}_{\mathit{ij}}^{\mathrm{\text{miss}}}\sim \mathit{N}\left(\mathbf{0},{\mathbf{3}}^{\mathbf{2}}\right)$	${\mathit{\delta }}_{\mathit{ij}}^{\mathrm{\text{miss}}}\sim \mathit{N}\left(\mathbf{0},{\mathbf{5}}^{\mathbf{2}}\right)$
Clerc 1994	2%	3%	4%
Dierick 1996	10%	9%	8%
Tylee 1997	9%	12%	14%
Costaesilva 1998	12%	14%	15%
Alves 1999	3%	4%	4%
Rudolph 1999	6%	6%	6%
Silverstone 1999	8%	6%	5%
Tzanakaki 2000	3%	5%	6%
Schatzberg 2006	6%	5%	5%
Nemeroff 2007	6%	8%	9%
Keller 2007	25%	18%	13%
Sheehan 2009	6%	6%	6%
Heller 2009	1%	1%	1%
Chang 2015	4%	5%	5%

Abbreviations: LOCF, last observation carried forward.