An Ethical Framework for the Practice of Paying Research Subjects

Ackerman, Terrence F.

doi:10.2307/3564170

Cited by 39 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ackerman, for example, suggests that research participation resembles unskilled labor (Ackerman, 1989). We argue, in contrast, that research has particular characteristics which warrant treating it as a category sui generis.…”

Section: Guinea Pigs On the Payroll 15mentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Nor does it mean that financial compensation could be used as a means to justify high risk studies. It would be possible to limit the amount of risk healthy subjects are allowed to undergo to, say, minimal risk (Royal College of Physicians, 1986), or a minor increment over minimal risk (Ackerman, 1989), while also recognizing that some studies warrant higher compensation than others by virtue of the risk, pain, discomfort, or inconvenience that subjects are required to undergo. A framework of labor relations would be useful in these kinds of circumstances.…”

Section: Guinea Pigs On the Payroll 15mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Guinea Pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects

Lemmens

Elliott

1999

Accountability in Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regulatory bodies and scholars have traditionally conceptualized biomedical research on healthy subjects in the same way as research on patients. Guidelines and regulations have portrayed payment to a healthy subject as a potential constraint, or "undue influence," on the subject's free consent. In this essay we suggest an alternative way of conceptualizing research on healthy subjects, which sees the basic issue not as one of undue influence but as one of justice. Healthy subjects generally enroll in research protocols not for humanitarian reasons but for the money they will receive. Many of these protocols are conducted by profit-driven corporations. Yet current guidelines and regulations prohibit subjects from negotiating for fair payment for the risks, discomforts and inconveniences they undergo, and IRBs are not staffed adequately to monitor the subject's safety. We propose to remedy the situation by regulating payment to healthy subjects as a labor relation.

show abstract

Section: Guinea Pigs On the Payroll 15mentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Guinea Pigs On the Payroll 15mentioning

confidence: 98%

Guinea Pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects

Lemmens

Elliott

1999

Accountability in Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limiting the amount of money offered for research participation might minimize the chances that it will unduly influence participants in this way (43,44). In my view, offering modest amounts of money is unlikely to obscure risks or impair the judgment of most individuals.…”

Section: Reasons To Pay Research Subjects Related Comments and Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Payment of clinical research subjects

Grady¹

2005

Journal of Clinical Investigation

292

340

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offering payment to clinical research subjects, in an effort to enhance recruitment by providing an incentive to take part or enabling subjects to participate without financial sacrifice, is a common yet uneven and contentious practice in the US. Concern exists regarding the potential for payment to unduly influence participation and thus obscure risks, impair judgment, or encourage misrepresentation. Heightening these concerns is the participation not only of adults but also of children in pediatric research trials. Thorough assessment of risks, careful eligibility screening, and attention to a participant's freedom to refuse all serve to reduce the possibility of compensation adversely affecting the individual and/or the study. Institutional review boards currently evaluate payment proposals with minimal guidance from federal regulations. Here, reasons for providing payment, payment models, ethical concerns, and areas for further research are examined.

show abstract

“…Ackerman (1989) writes that as long as studies are safe, it cannot be against a subject's best interests to participate, regardless of the amount of payment. He then makes clear that he believes that studies are indeed safe due to the regulations currently in place.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Undue Inducement: The Only Objection to Payment?

Vanderwalde

2005

The American Journal of Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Ethical Framework for the Practice of Paying Research Subjects

Cited by 39 publications

References 1 publication

Guinea Pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects

Guinea Pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects

Payment of clinical research subjects

Undue Inducement: The Only Objection to Payment?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About