Literature DB >> 18395365

Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow-up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion.

David S Festinger1, Douglas B Marlowe, Karen L Dugosh, Jason R Croft, Patricia L Arabia.   

Abstract

In a prior study [Festinger, D.S., Marlowe, D.B., Croft, J.R., Dugosh, K.L., Mastro, N.K., Lee, P.A., DeMatteo, D.S., Patapis, N.S., 2005. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug Alcohol Depend. 78 (3) 275-281] we found that neither the mode (cash vs. gift card) nor magnitude ($10, $40, or $70) of research follow-up payments increased rates of new drug use or perceptions of coercion. However, higher payments and payments in cash were associated with better follow-up attendance, reduced tracking efforts, and improved participant satisfaction with the study. The present study extended those findings to higher payment magnitudes. Participants from an urban outpatient substance abuse treatment program were randomly assigned to receive $70, $100, $130, or $160 in either cash or a gift card for completing a follow-up assessment at 6 months post-admission (n congruent with 50 per cell). Apart from the payment incentives, all participants received a standardized, minimal platform of follow-up efforts. Findings revealed that neither the magnitude nor mode of payment had a significant effect on new drug use or perceived coercion. Consistent with our previous findings, higher payments and cash payments resulted in significantly higher follow-up rates and fewer tracking calls. In addition participants receiving cash vs. gift cards were more likely to use their payments for essential, non-luxury purchases. Follow-up rates for participants receiving cash payments of $100, $130, and $160 approached or exceeded the FDA required minimum of 70% for studies to be considered in evaluations of new medications. This suggests that the use of higher magnitude payments and cash payments may be effective strategies for obtaining more representative follow-up samples without increasing new drug use or perceptions of coercion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18395365      PMCID: PMC2475801          DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend        ISSN: 0376-8716            Impact factor:   4.492


  23 in total

1.  Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale.

Authors:  D L Larsen; C C Attkisson; W A Hargreaves; T D Nguyen
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  1979

2.  Preferences for clinic privileges, retail items and social activities in an outpatient buprenorphine treatment program.

Authors:  L Amass; W K Bickel; J P Crean; S T Higgins; G J Badger
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb

3.  Achieving a 96.6 percent follow-up rate in a longitudinal study of drug abusers.

Authors:  L B Cottler; W M Compton; A Ben-Abdallah; M Horne; D Claverie
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.492

4.  A piece of my mind. Subject to payment?

Authors:  G McGee
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-07-16       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Disability payments and chemical dependence: conflicting values and uncertain effects.

Authors:  R Rosenheck
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.084

6.  Two scales for measuring patients' perceptions for coercion during mental hospital admission.

Authors:  W Gardner; S K Hoge; N Bennett; L H Roth; C W Lidz; J Monahan; E P Mulvey
Journal:  Behav Sci Law       Date:  1993

Review 7.  Obtaining follow-up interviews for treatment evaluation.

Authors:  D P Desmond; J F Maddux; T H Johnson; B A Confer
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr

8.  A menu of potential reinforcers in a methadone maintenance program.

Authors:  J M Schmitz; H Rhoades; J Grabowski
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  1994 Sep-Oct

9.  Oral methadone self-administration: effects of dose and alternative reinforcers.

Authors:  M L Stitzer; M E McCaul; G E Bigelow; I A Liebson
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  Disability income, cocaine use, and repeated hospitalization among schizophrenic cocaine abusers--a government-sponsored revolving door?

Authors:  A Shaner; T A Eckman; L J Roberts; J N Wilkins; D E Tucker; J W Tsuang; J Mintz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-09-21       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  53 in total

1.  Compensation effects on clinical trial data collection in opioid-dependent young adults.

Authors:  Claire E Wilcox; Michael P Bogenschutz; Masato Nakazawa; George E Woody
Journal:  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 3.829

2.  Perceptions of reimbursement for clinical trial participation.

Authors:  Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Melissa Loza; Kathleen Vincent; Thomas Moench; Lawrence R Stanberry; Susan L Rosenthal
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 3.  Contingency Management Interventions for HIV, Tuberculosis, and Hepatitis Control Among Individuals With Substance Use Disorders: A Systematized Review.

Authors:  Evan S Herrmann; Alexis K Matusiewicz; Maxine L Stitzer; Stephen T Higgins; Stacey C Sigmon; Sarah H Heil
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2016-06-24

4.  Research participation by low-income and racial/ethnic minority groups: how payment may change the balance.

Authors:  Jennifer K Walter; James F Burke; Matthew M Davis
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 4.689

5.  The provision of cell phones as a recruitment and retention strategy for people who inject drugs enrolling in a randomized trial.

Authors:  Catherine Stewart; Hannah Kopinski; Jane Liebschutz; Inga Holmdahl; Julia Keosaian; Debra Herman; Bradley Anderson; Michael Stein
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.492

6.  Correlates of hepatitis B virus and HIV knowledge among gay and bisexual homeless young adults in Hollywood.

Authors:  Adeline Nyamathi; Benissa Salem; Cathy J Reback; Steven Shoptaw; Catherine M Branson; Faith E Idemundia; Barbara Kennedy; Farinaz Khalilifard; Mary Marfisee; Yihang Liu
Journal:  Am J Mens Health       Date:  2012-08-08

7.  Retention strategies for health disparities preventive trials: findings from the Early Childhood Caries Collaborating Centers.

Authors:  Raul I Garcia; Tamanna Tiwari; Francisco Ramos-Gomez; Brenda Heaton; Mario Orozco; Margaret Rasmussen; Patricia Braun; Michelle Henshaw; Belinda Borrelli; Judith Albino; Courtney Diamond; Christina Gebel; Terrence S Batliner; Judith C Barker; Steven Gregorich; Stuart A Gansky
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 1.821

8.  Ethics in Psychiatric Research: A Review of 25 Years of NIH-funded Empirical Research Projects.

Authors:  James Dubois; Holly Bante; Whitney B Hadley
Journal:  AJOB Prim Res       Date:  2011-12-06

9.  Recommendations for Performing Internet-Based Research on Sensitive Subject Matter with "Hidden" or Difficult-to-Reach Populations.

Authors:  Hugh Klein; Thomas P Lambing; David A Moskowitz; Thomas Alex Washington; Lisa K Gilbert
Journal:  J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv       Date:  2010-11-06

Review 10.  Measures of outcome for stimulant trials: ACTTION recommendations and research agenda.

Authors:  Brian D Kiluk; Kathleen M Carroll; Amy Duhig; Daniel E Falk; Kyle Kampman; Shengan Lai; Raye Z Litten; David J McCann; Ivan D Montoya; Kenzie L Preston; Phil Skolnick; Constance Weisner; George Woody; Redonna Chandler; Michael J Detke; Kelly Dunn; Robert H Dworkin; Joanne Fertig; Jennifer Gewandter; F Gerard Moeller; Tatiana Ramey; Megan Ryan; Kenneth Silverman; Eric C Strain
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2015-11-21       Impact factor: 4.492

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.