TirzTom said:

I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.

Second this. Posting only so the count is not one.

TirzTom said:

I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.

One thing that is still open after TirzTom’s answer:

Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?

josh_phd_bmore said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.