undocumented CROSSROADS participation, our estimates of completeness will be toward the low end of the range cited above. But, we have retained all of the remaining unknown cases as missing participants, which tends to inflate the missing rate. In summary, the additional follow-up by DNA-NTPR suggests that the participant capture rate may be toward the high end of the 93–99 percent range.
We estimate that fewer than 2–4 percent of the current participants included in the NTPR data set may not actually be CROSSROADS participants (i.e., they are false positives). We are also confident that the data captures between 93 and 99 percent of those who were actually CROSSROADS participants. Since we were conservative in matching purported participants to the NTPR participant list, erring on the side of exclusion, the inclusion rate could actually be higher. If additional follow-up information provided by DNA-NTPR is considered, the capture rate would be toward the upper end of the range. In short, there is no evidence from any of the above sources that the roster of CROSSROADS participants studied by MFUA is deficient in a substantial manner.