Table 5 GRADE evidence profile.

From: Prognostic role of microscopically positive margins for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Quality assessment

No of patients

Effect

Quality

Importance

No of studies

Design

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

R1 resection

R0 resection

Relative (95% CI)

Absolute

Recurrence rate (follow-up 8.8–24 years)

9

observational studies

no serious risk of bias

serious1

no serious indirectness

no serious imprecision

increased effect for RR ~12

75/220 (34.1%)

485/1475 (32.9%)

OR 1.203 (0.632 to 2.287)

42 more per 1000 (from 92 fewer to 200 more)

ΟΟ Low

Critical

Disease-free survival (follow-up 6.1–24 years)

12

observational studies

no serious risk of bias

no serious inconsistency

no serious indirectness

no serious imprecision

increased effect for RR ~12

232

1673

HR 1.596 (1.128 to 2.258)

Ο Moderate

Critical

Overall survival (follow-up 6.1–17 years)

8

observational studies

no serious risk of bias

serious1

no serious indirectness

no serious imprecision

increased effect for RR ~12

67

486

HR 1.430 (0.068 to 3.363)

ΟΟ Low

Important

  1. 1The statistical test for heterogeneity showed a low P value.
  2. 2Numerous specimen processing variables when assessing positive margins might influence the rate of positive margins.