No, this ‘my friend said…’ post does not change the algorithm, because further information is needed.
1. Does this increased risk actually exist, and (if so) is it unique to Shouldice?
2. If so, what is the natural risk and what is the increased risk?
3. How does this increased risk factor into the overall list of risks/benefits associated with Shouldice and the other repair options?
(You can get even deeper into the weeds and wonder if the increased risk is the same for every Shouldice patient or does it depend upon certain surgeon/patient/hernia factors, but we’ll keep it simple).
I’ll give you an example of how a context-free ‘increased risk’ claim is not only unhelpful, but might even lead you to make the wrong decision for yourself.
As part of a broader talk years ago, a statistician recounted her doctor advising her to have an induced (vs. natural) childbirth to avoid ‘doubling the risk of miscarriage’ in her situation.
That sounds scary as heck, doesn’t it? Shouldn’t that be an EASY decision? Surely she would want to avoid DOUBLING her risk of having a miscarriage, right?
Not so fast. It turned out the natural risk was 1 in 1000 (0.1%), so the doubling only resulted in the risk rising to 2 in 1000 (0.2%). Coupled with other reasons (which relates to my third question), she elected not to be induced.
Context matters.