{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01904761904761905, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.255952380952381, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness analysis for clinical procedures in oncology.

The provision of medical care consumes resources, and the resources available for the provision of medical care are limited. Decisions are being made at many levels of the Health Care System, including providers and fiscal intermediaries, to allocate these resources. Such decisions, however, are often inconsistent with the objective of deriving the maximum health benefits from the resources spent. Many cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost studies have been conducted in order to guide present and future resource allocation decisions. Many analyses have not been accepted by health care decision makers because a critical factor or issue has been omitted. In the attempt to be objective, the analyst may avoid uncertainties or subjective value judgments that often dominate the thinking of the decision maker. The role of the analyst in cost-effectiveness analysis, as in decision analysis for the individual patient, is to clarify and highlight such factors not to obfuscate them.