"Treat as a double" when hitting instead of doubling down

Let's say the TC doesn't meet or exceed the index required for doubling, so you hit instead. You catch a small card and your hand total is now between 12-16.

Assuming a double deck game and disregarding composition dependent strategy, card eating, side counting and other techniques, is it in the player's best interest to play the hand as the total value and hit again, or "treat it as a double" and stand?

I'm not trying to imply that the order of the remaining cards are sacred and to be preserved. I'm just wondering what the least costly decision is.

I would guess that the way to measure the cost is to first calculate the cost of doubling against a certain dealer's up card at TCs lower than the index, then comparing it to the cost of standing or hitting. Not sure.

One example: index for a certain count system says to double 9v4 at >=-3. Count is below that, so I hit and catch a 3 for a total of 12. Index says to hit 12v4 at <0. In this example, should I hit since the count dictate or "treat as a double" and stand? Basic strategy says to stand 12v4, and composition dependent strategy says to hit 10-2 and stand on the rest.

What about for 11vA, 11v10, 11v9, 10v9, or 10v8?

I'm sure every player has come across this situation, but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere.

You invented the concept of "treat as double." It doesn't exist.

You didn't double because the count said to hit. You hit and now have a new situation; the old one is history. It doesn't exist anymore. You consider your new total, the dealer's upcard, the index for THAT new play, and whether you should hit or stand. Period.

You're overthinking this. The reason you haven't seen this situation discussed anywhere is because there's nothing to discuss. Play the hand you have NOW according to the count. Period.

Don