Dr.SportsMedIN said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

I read this differently from Dr.SportsMedIN, on substance rather than tone. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.

One concrete data point for the thread. 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.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

JennaRN said:

Pushing back on the consensus forming here.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

Reporting back.

Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread. Writing that down for the next person who wants the interesting answer.