Open AccessPaying Hypertension Research Subjects
Author(s) -
Casarett David,
Karlawish Jason,
Asch David A.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
journal of general internal medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.746
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 1525-1497
pISSN - 0884-8734
DOI - 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.11115.x
Subject(s) - liberian dollar , payment , medicine , actuarial science , undue influence , cash , business , law , finance , political science
CONTEXT: Cash payments are often used to compensate subjects who participate in research. However, ethicists have argued that these payments might constitute an undue inducement. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether potential subjects agree with theoretical arguments that a payment could be an undue inducement. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Survey of 350 prospective jurors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Belief that a $500 payment for research participation would impair their own, and others' ability to think carefully about the risks and benefits of a clinical trial. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty‐one jurors (74.6%) believed that a $500 payment would impair subjects' ability to think carefully about the risks and benefits of research. Ninety‐six of 120 (80%) expressed this concern about subjects with a low income (<$20,000) compared to 92/117 (79%) of those with a middle income ($20,000 to $50,000), and 73/113 (65%) with a high income (>$50,000). In contrast, only 69 (19.7%) of jurors believed that a $500 payment would influence them. Jurors who believed that this payment would influence them reported lower incomes and less education. CONCLUSION: Members of the general public share ethical concerns about the influence of payments for research, although they believe that these concerns are more applicable to others than to themselves.