Article Text
Abstract
Recognising that offers of payment to research participants can serve various purposes—reimbursement, compensation and incentive—helps uncover differences between participants, which can justify differential payment of participants within the same study. Participants with different study-related expenses will need different amounts of reimbursement to be restored to their preparticipation financial baseline. Differential compensation can be acceptable when some research participants commit more time or assume greater burdens than others, or if inter-site differences affect the value of compensation. Finally, it may be permissible to offer differential incentive payments if necessary to advance the goals of a study. We encourage investigators and Institutional Review Boards to think about whether to offer payment, in what amounts and for what purpose, and also to consider whether differential payment can help promote the scientific and ethical goals of clinical research.
- research ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors All the authors contributed to the design of the research question, research, writing of content and substantive revisions of the manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- What constitutes a reasonable compensation for non-commercial oocyte donors: an analogy with living organ donation and medical research participation
- Human infection challenge studies in endemic settings and/or low-income and middle-income countries: key points of ethical consensus and controversy
- Quantitative valuation placed by children and teenagers on participation in two hypothetical research scenarios
- The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process
- ‘You want to deal with power while riding on power’: global perspectives on power in participatory health research and co-production approaches
- Appropriateness of no-fault compensation for research-related injuries from an African perspective: an appeal for action by African countries
- Increasing the amount of payment to research subjects
- What makes clinical labour different? The case of human guinea pigging
- Review of policies for injuries to research participants in India
- Why urban communities from low-income and middle-income countries participate in public and global health research: protocol for a scoping review