Table 5.

Strength of responders’ opinions as to likelihood of missing studies in RD <1 cm versus RD =0 cm and number of studies elicited

Strength of opinion of likelihood of missing studies	n	Estimated missing studies			Effect estimates*
		Mean (SD)	Median (IQR)	Range	LogHR (SElogHR)	HR (95% CI)
‘Not likely’	1	0	0	0	0 (0.25)†	1.0 (0.61 to 1.63)†
‘Somewhat likely’	5	5.8 (2.4)	5 (5–5)	4–10	−0.098 (0.074)	0.91 (0.78 to 1.05)
‘Quite likely’	8	17.8 (13.9)	12.5 (10–20)	7–50	−0.144 (0.054)	0.87 (0.78 to 0.96)
‘Very/extremely likely’	4	37.5	40(25–50)	20–50	−0.078 (0.035)	0.92 (0.86 to 0.99)
All responders	18	17.8 (16.5)	10 (5–20)	0–50	−0.103 (0.066)	0.90 (0.79 to 1.03)

*Calculated using a simple weighted average of each responder.

†No studies were estimated from responder so for purposes of analysis and calculation of pooled estimate, one small and imprecise study was used.

RD, residual disease.