NurseKim_ATL said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.

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

Reporting back.

Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.

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

What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?

Old thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. 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.

JessicaM_2024 said:

Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.

Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.