Literature DB >> 19385834

A Review of Paying Research Participants: It's Time to Move Beyond the ethical Debate.

Elizabeth B D Ripley1.   

Abstract

CURRENT REGULATORY GUIDELINES REQUIRE the ethical review committee to consider one question when evaluating payment: Is the payment to the participant undue or coercive? Although this is a seemingly simple question, determining appropriate payment involves a series of complex issues. There is limited empirical knowledge to assist with this determination and little consensus on which elements of a study should be considered in making these decisions. For example, should the culture of the study population or the potential risks and benefits of the research be considered in the selection of appropriate payment? Following a review of national and international guidelines, the concerns and benefits of paying research participants are presented, and prior ethical debate is outlined. The current research literature on the practice of paying participants and the impact of payment on participants and study integrity are reviewed. Finally, given continued debate with limited data to help determine best practices, a research agenda is proposed to assist in the development of an empirical basis to aid investigators and ethical review committees in making appropriate decisions about payment to research participants.

Entities:  

Year:  2006        PMID: 19385834     DOI: 10.1525/jer.2006.1.4.9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics        ISSN: 1556-2646            Impact factor:   1.742


  11 in total

1.  Why do we pay? A national survey of investigators and IRB chairpersons.

Authors:  Elizabeth Ripley; Francis Macrina; Monika Markowitz; Chris Gennings
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.742

2.  Who's doing the math? Are we really compensating research participants?

Authors:  Elizabeth Ripley; Francis Macrina; Monika Markowitz; Chris Gennings
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.742

3.  Enhancing HIV vaccine trial consent preparedness among street drug users.

Authors:  Celia B Fisher
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.742

4.  A Qualitative Study of Social, Cultural, and Historical Influences on African American Women's Infant-Feeding Practices.

Authors:  Stephanie DeVane-Johnson; Cheryl Woods Giscombe; Ronald Williams; Cathie Fogel; Suzanne Thoyre
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2018

5.  The Motivations and Experiences of Young Women in a Microbicide Trial in the USA and Puerto Rico.

Authors:  Rebecca Giguere; Gregory D Zimet; Jessica A Kahn; Curtis Dolezal; Cheng-Shiun Leu; Marina Mabragaña; Ian McGowan; Alex Carballo-Diéguez
Journal:  World J AIDS       Date:  2013-09

6.  Transparency of participant incentives in HIV research.

Authors:  Brandon Brown; Jerome T Galea; Peter Davidson; Kaveh Khoshnood
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 12.767

7.  Payment of egg donors in stem cell research in the USA.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman; Mark V Sauer
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.828

8.  Commonly performed procedures in clinical research: a benchmark for payment.

Authors:  Dinora Dominguez; Mandy Jawara; Nicole Martino; Ninet Sinaii; Christine Grady
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  Evaluating the Impact of Incentives on Clinical Trial Participation: Protocol for a Mixed Methods, Community-Engaged Study.

Authors:  Karah Y Greene; Jerome T Galea; Brandon Nguyen; Andrea N Polonijo; Karine Dubé; Jeff Taylor; Christopher Christensen; Zhiwei Zhang; Brandon Brown
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2021-11-23

10.  Are all "research fields" equal? Rethinking practice for the use of data from crowdsourcing market places.

Authors:  Ilka H Gleibs
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2017-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.