Centre for Geographic Medicine Research (Coast), Kenya Medical Research Institute-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Kilifi, Kenya.
Nuffield Department of Medicine, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Apr 20;23(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00783-y.
Human Infection Studies (HIS) have emerged as an important research approach with the potential to fast track the global development of vaccines and treatments for infectious diseases, including in low resource settings. Given the high level of burdens involved in many HIS, particularly prolonged residency and biological sampling requirements, it can be challenging to identify levels of study payments that provide adequate compensation but avoid 'undue' levels of inducement to participate. Through this embedded ethics study, involving 97 healthy volunteers and other research stakeholders in a malaria HIS programme in Kenya, and using in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and observations during and after a malaria HIS, we give a grounded account of ethical issues emerging in relation to study payments in this setting. While careful community, national, international scientific and ethics review processes meant that risks of serious harm were highly unlikely, the levels of motivation to join HIS seen could raise concerns about study payments being too high. Particular value was placed on the reliability, rather than level, of study payment in this setting, where subsistence livelihoods are common. Study volunteers were generally clear about the study aims at the point of recruitment, and this knowledge was retained over a year later, although most reported experiencing more burdens than anticipated at enrolment. Strict study screening procedures, regular clinical and laboratory monitoring of volunteers, with prompt treatment with antimalarial at predetermined endpoints suggested that the risks of serious harm were highly unlikely. Ethical concerns emerged in relation to volunteers' attempts to conceal symptoms, hoping to prolong residency periods and increase study payments; and volunteers making decisions that compromised important family relationships and personal values. Our findings support an interpretation that, although study volunteers were keen to join the study to access cash payments, they also paid attention to other features of the study and the general clinical research landscape, including levels of risk associated with study participation. Overall, our analysis shows that the ethical concerns emerging from the study payments can be addressed through practical measures, hinged on reducing burdens and strengthening communication, raising important issues for research policy and planning.
人类感染研究(HIS)已经成为一种重要的研究方法,具有加速传染病疫苗和治疗方法在全球范围内发展的潜力,包括在资源匮乏的环境中。鉴于许多 HIS 涉及到的高负担,特别是长期居住和生物采样要求,确定提供足够补偿但避免“过度”参与诱因的研究支付水平可能具有挑战性。通过这项嵌入式伦理研究,涉及肯尼亚疟疾 HIS 计划中的 97 名健康志愿者和其他研究利益相关者,我们使用深入访谈、焦点小组讨论和观察,在疟疾 HIS 期间和之后,详细描述了与该环境中研究支付相关的出现的伦理问题。虽然仔细的社区、国家、国际科学和伦理审查过程意味着严重伤害的风险极不可能,但参与 HIS 的动机水平可能令人担忧研究支付过高。在这种情况下,特别是在普遍存在生计的情况下,研究支付的可靠性而不是水平具有特别的价值。研究志愿者在招募时通常对研究目的很清楚,并且在一年后仍然保留了这些知识,尽管大多数人报告说在登记时遇到的负担比预期的要多。严格的研究筛选程序、对志愿者的定期临床和实验室监测,以及在预定终点时用抗疟药物进行及时治疗,表明严重伤害的风险极不可能。志愿者试图隐瞒症状、希望延长居留期并增加研究支付,以及志愿者做出损害重要家庭关系和个人价值观的决定,这些都引发了伦理方面的担忧。我们的研究结果支持这样一种解释,即尽管研究志愿者热衷于通过获得现金支付来参加研究,但他们也关注研究的其他方面和一般的临床研究情况,包括与研究参与相关的风险水平。总的来说,我们的分析表明,通过减轻负担和加强沟通等实际措施,可以解决研究支付引发的伦理问题,这为研究政策和规划提出了重要问题。