nominally significantP < 0.05
Fifty-five percent (26/47) of these effects were nominally significant at P < 0.05 and showed an increased risk.
Fifty-five percent (26/47) of these effects were nominally significant at P < 0.05 and showed an increased risk.
In addition to this, reporting bias by the authors of meta-analyses could have led to underreporting of associations that did not reach statistical significance or did not conform with general knowledge and expectations [ 90 , 91 ].