Who's doing the math? Are we really compensating research participants?

Elizabeth Ripley, Francis Macrina, Monika Markowitz, Chris Gennings

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although compensation for expenses to participants in research projects is considered important and the primary reason for paying, there is no evidence to support that investigators and IRB members actually calculate participant cost. Payment recommendations for six hypothetical studies were obtained from a national survey of IRB chairpersons (N = 353) and investigators (N = 495). Survey respondents also recommended payment for specific study procedures. We calculated participant cost for the six hypothetical cases both by procedures and by time involvement. A large percentage recommended only token payments for survey, registry, and medical record review studies. Most chose payment for pharmaceutical studies but the recommended payment did not compensate for calculated costs. Results suggest that compensation and reimbursement as the primary reasons for paying research participants may not match actual practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)57-65
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
Volume5
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Ethics
  • Institutional Review Board
  • Payment

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Who's doing the math? Are we really compensating research participants?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this