Collins Alexandra B, Strike Carol, Guta Adrian, Baltzer Turje Rosalind, McDougall Patrick, Parashar Surita, McNeil Ryan
BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Int J Drug Policy. 2017 Jan;39:92-98. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.09.004. Epub 2016 Oct 22.
Compensation for participating in research has been a fundamental element of the research apparatus despite concerns about its impact on incentivising participation. Researchers and research ethics boards acknowledge that compensation may prompt structurally vulnerable populations, such as people who use drugs (PWUD), to engage in research primarily out of financial need. Thus, institutional restrictions around compensation have been implemented. This study explores the ethical implications of compensation practices aimed at 'protecting' structurally vulnerable people living with HIV (PLHIV) who use drugs within the context of individuals' lived realities.
We draw on five focus groups conducted in 2011 with 25 PLHIV who use drugs and access a community-based HIV care facility in Vancouver, Canada. This analysis focused on participants' perceptions of research compensation, which became the central point of discussion in each group.
Participants viewed research as a transactional process through which they could challenge the underpinnings of bioethics and bargain for compensation. Research compensation was thus critical to attracting participants and positioned as a 'legitimate' form of income. Participants' medicalised identities, specifically living with HIV, were fundamental to justifying compensation. The type of compensation (e.g. gift card, cash) also significantly impacted whether participants were fully compensated and, at times, served to exacerbate their structural vulnerability.
Research compensation is critical in shaping structurally vulnerable populations' participation and experiences with research and can further marginalize individuals. Practices surrounding research compensation, particularly for drug-using and HIV-positive populations, need to be evaluated to ensure participants are equitably compensated for the expertise they provide.
尽管人们担心参与研究的补偿会对激励参与产生影响,但它一直是研究体系的一个基本要素。研究人员和研究伦理委员会承认,补偿可能会促使结构上易受伤害的人群,如吸毒者,主要出于经济需要而参与研究。因此,已经实施了围绕补偿的制度限制。本研究探讨了在个人生活现实背景下,旨在“保护”结构上易受伤害的吸毒艾滋病毒感染者参与研究的补偿做法的伦理影响。
我们利用2011年与25名吸毒且在加拿大温哥华一家社区艾滋病毒护理机构接受治疗的艾滋病毒感染者进行的五个焦点小组讨论。该分析侧重于参与者对研究补偿的看法,这成为每个小组讨论的核心要点。
参与者将研究视为一个交易过程,通过这个过程他们可以挑战生物伦理学的基础并争取补偿。因此,研究补偿对于吸引参与者至关重要,并被定位为一种“合法”的收入形式。参与者的患病身份,特别是感染艾滋病毒,是补偿合理性的根本依据。补偿类型(如礼品卡、现金)也对参与者是否得到充分补偿有显著影响,有时还会加剧他们在结构上的脆弱性。
研究补偿对于塑造结构上易受伤害人群参与研究的情况和经历至关重要,并且可能会进一步使个人边缘化。需要对围绕研究补偿的做法进行评估,特别是针对吸毒和艾滋病毒呈阳性人群的做法,以确保参与者因其提供的专业知识而得到公平补偿。