On measuring attitudes about payment for research

Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (12):833-834 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Significant attention has been given both to the ethics of Controlled Human Infection Model research and the ethics of payment for research participation. However, comparatively little attention has been given to the ethics of paying for participation specifically in CHIM research. Grimwade et al should be commended for thoughtfully addressing this topic and especially for the empirical data collection informing their work, which is too often lacking in discussions of payment for research participation. In what follows I will discuss three relatively subtle factors that, I believe, make a difference to the ethical analysis of paying for research participation and raise what I intend to be constructive questions about the extent to which the survey instrument employed by the authors captures them. The authors focus on payment for risk in CHIM research. They correctly stress that compensating participants for risk is controversial and that “many general guidelines warn against paying for the risk in medical research”. While not all guidance documents share this scepticism,1 compensating for risk raises thorny issues and uncertainty over the topic among IRBs and regulatory bodies is likely to hinder the practice. Part of the difficulty in assessing payment for research risks stems from the way in which subtle variances in background assumptions influence the ethical assessment, which also complicates empirical attempts to measure attitudes on the topic. Most importantly, it is crucial to be precise about background assumptions concerning whether participants are protected from bearing the financial burdens of research risks that eventuate in actual harms. Protective mechanisms …

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,466

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Payments to Research Subjects.Martin Wilkinson - 2005 - Monash Bioethics Review 24 (1):70-74.
Increasing the Amount of Payment to Research Subjects.D. B. Resnick - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e14-e14.
How Payment For Research Participation Can Be Coercive.Joseph Millum & Michael Garnett - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (9):21-31.
Payment for Research Participation: A Coercive Offer?A. Wertheimer & F. G. Miller - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):389-392.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-11-25

Downloads
1 (#1,489,356)

6 months
1 (#417,143)

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Luke Gelinas
Albany Medical College

References found in this work

Undue Inducement: Nonsense on Stilts?Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):9-13.
The Authors.[author unknown] - 1973 - Proceedings of the Heraclitean Society 1 (1).

Add more references