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.
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Emergency care research ethics in low - income and middle - income countries
- Clinical research with economically disadvantaged populations
- Individual genetic and genomic research results and the tradition of informed consent: exploring US review board guidance
- Are positive experiences of children in non-therapeutic research justifiable research benefits
- ‘ Ethical responsibility ’ or ‘ a whole can of worms ’: differences in opinion on incidental finding review and disclosure in neuroimaging research from focus group discussions with participants, parents, IRB members, investigators, physicians and community members
- For love and money: the need to rethink benefits in HIV cure studies
- The child 's perspective on discomfort during medical research procedures: a descriptive study
- The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process
- Unrealistic optimism and the ethics of phase I cancer research
- A comparison of justice frameworks for international research