The difficulty is magnified in cancer because of the intense emotions it raises and their influence on decision making, impacting treatment funding decisions.
The payback [ 8], the cost-benefit [ 9, 10], and the decision making impact models [ 11] are examples of evaluation approaches reported in scientific and health policy literature.
These types of questions need to be addressed differently, because societal decision-making impacts the environment, which feeds back to influence future societal decision-making.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that decision-making impacts us physically and mentally.
A payback framework studies the impact of the health researches in five levels: knowledge advanced, capacitating building, impacts on decision-making, impacts on health, and socioeconomic impacts [ 27– 29].
Although the study was primarily aimed at analysing impact on informed decision-making, impacts on other categories were also identified and described (capacity building, health benefits, and broad economic benefits).
Moreover, the decision-making impact of endoscopic biopsies remains questionable, due to the high false negative rate of this procedure [ 15- 17].
This is the first study to prospectively assess the decision-making impact of BCI assay in a routine clinical practice setting in patients who face the decision to continue with extended adjuvant endocrine therapy or stop at 5 years.
Studies are ongoing to prospectively evaluate patient urologist shared decision-making, impact on quality of life, outcomes and healthcare economics for the postoperative therapy of high-risk prostate cancer.
Results show that experience of the decision making process impacts on relatives' well-being.
Interviews highlighted four themes surrounding decision making: perceived impact of side effects, the impact of others' experience on beliefs about tamoxifen, tamoxifen as a 'cancer drug', and daily reminder of cancer risk.
