Thanks for linking this. I wish though that there were a more useful standard of summary: a list of a lot of "nicotine has a negative effect on X" and "associat

Thanks for linking this. I wish though that there were a more useful standard of summary: a list of a lot of "nicotine has a negative effect on X" and "associated with a negative on Y" that only tells you a sign, which some publication found statistically "significant". What matters for decisions is effect size and the probable range thereof. (Either sign has a prior probability of 50%, and you can expect publication bias.) Since I'm only curious I'm not doing all the work to try to figure that out; hope someone else has that kind of review.