Table 2.
Meeting attendance and the average number of redacted names over the study period.
| Timeframe (TF) | No. of meetings | No. of expertsa listed in minutesb | No. of experts named and attending 50% or more of meetingsc | Number of experts named in meetings | Average number of redacted namesd in meetings | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | Min. | Max. | Experts | Observers | Secretariat | ||||
| TF1 | 16 | 37 | 15 | 15.1 | 8 | 21 | 1.25 | 1.00 | 4.63 |
| TF2 | 23 | 56 | 32 | 28.3 | 16 | 37 | 0.30 | 2.13 | 7.26 |
| TF3 | 19 | 78 | 35 | 29.0 | 7 | 47 | 0.63 | 6.47 | 13.21 |
| TF4 | 16 | 74 | 36 | 34.9 | 29 | 42 | 0.56 | 7.00 | 15.94 |
| TF5 | 15 | 79 | 39 | 38.3 | 30 | 44 | 0.67 | 8.27 | 15.20 |
| Whole study period | 89 | 142 | 32 | 29.0 | 7 | 47 | 0.65 | 10.78 | 4.76 |
aSome attendees switched from experts to observers and vice versa during the process—however, in our final count, we only accounted for each attendee’s most frequent role.
bThis is our count using our expert database, rather than the official count provided in the minutes. On some occasions, we found that the number of named attendees plus the listed redactions did not add up to the officially provided number of total attendees e.g., meeting 62.
cValue taken is rounded up, e.g., if 15 meetings, those listed attended eight or more meetings.
dThese are the officially provided counts for redactions in the meeting minutes.