Ripley Elizabeth, Macrina Francis, Markowitz Monika, Gennings Chris
Division of nephrology, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2010 Sep;5(3):57-65. doi: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.3.57.
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.
尽管对研究项目参与者的费用补偿被认为很重要且是支付的主要原因,但没有证据支持研究者和机构审查委员会(IRB)成员实际计算了参与者成本。通过对IRB主席(N = 353)和研究者(N = 495)的全国性调查,获得了六项假设研究的支付建议。调查对象还针对特定研究程序给出了支付建议。我们按程序和参与时间计算了这六个假设案例的参与者成本。很大比例的人建议对调查、登记和病历审查研究仅给予象征性支付。大多数人选择对药物研究进行支付,但建议支付金额并未补偿计算出的成本。结果表明,将补偿和报销作为支付研究参与者的主要原因可能与实际做法不符。