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 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)
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), 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.
Key words research ethics - informed consent - inducement - hypertension
Dr. Casarett is supported by a Health Services Research Career Development Award from the Department of Veterans Affairs.