Remuneration in the United States and Mexico: Assessing the level of influence on potential clinical research participants about their decision to participate in a clinical trial and the risk of fraud

Abstract

Monetary compensation given to study subjects in a clinical trial is an effective tool to increase overall study enrolment, nonetheless it may stimulate some participants to commit fraud and lie about their medical history.

A survey-study in 684 Hispanic prospective subjects in Mexico and USA was conducted to evaluate if a high monetary compensation would encourage them to lie about their medical history. Almost half of the subjects considered participating in a clinical trial with no compensation. Younger male individuals were more likely to consider committing fraud in order to receive a relatively high compensation. On the other hand, individuals with either low or high educational backgrounds, as those with higher income, were less likely to consider committing fraud.

Keywords

Fraud compensation remuneration clinical trials participants Mexico USA

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Largent

Grady

Miller

et al . Money, coercion, and undue inducement: a survey of attitudes about payments to research participants. IRB 2012; 34: 1–8.

Harris

Scientific research is a moral duty. J Med Ethics 2005; 31: 242–248.

Draper

Wilson

Flanagan

et al . Offering payments, reimbursement and incentives to patients and family doctors to encourage participation in research. Fam Pract 2009; 26: 231–238.

Permuth-Wey

Borenstein

AR.

Financial remuneration for clinical and behavioral research participation: ethical and practical considerations. Ann Epidemiol 2009; 19: 280–285.

Macklin

On paying money to research subjects: 'due' and 'undue' inducements. IRB 1981; 3: 1–6.

Grady

Dickert

Jawetz

et al . An analysis of U.S. practices of paying research participants. Contemp Clin Trials 2005; 26: 365–375.

Dickert

Emanuel

Grady

Paying research subjects: an analysis of current policies. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 368–373.

Bentley

Thacker

PG.

The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process. J Med Ethics 2004; 30: 293–298.

Dresser

Subversive subjects: rule-breaking and deception in clinical trials. J Law Med Ethics 2013; 41: 829–840, Table of Contents.

10.

Devine

Waters

Putnam

et al . Concealment and fabrication by experienced research subjects. Clin Trials 2013; 10: 935–948.

11.

Maakaron

Manchanda

Hoang

et al . Patient fraud: a tale of two tales. Am J Med 2014; 127: e5–e6.

12.

Resnik

DB.

Bioethical issues in providing financial incentives to research participants. Medicoleg Bioeth 2016; 5: 35–41.

13.

US FDA. Payment to Research Subjects – Information Sheet: Guidance for Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Investigators, www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm126429.htm (2016).

14.

Breitkopf

Loza

Vincent

et al . Perceptions of reimbursement for clinical trial participation. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011; 6: 31–38.

15.

Mantzari

Vogt

Marteau

TM.

Does incentivising pill-taking 'crowd out' risk-information processing? Evidence from a web-based experiment. Soc Sci Med 2014; 106: 75–82.

16.

Cryder

John London

Volpp

et al . Informative inducement: study payment as a signal of risk. Soc Sci Med 2010; 70: 455–464.

17.

Halpern

Karlawish

Casarett

et al . Empirical assessment of whether moderate payments are undue or unjust inducements for participation in clinical trials. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 801–803.

18.

Geppert

Candilis

Baker

et al . Motivations of patients with diabetes to participate in research. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2014; 5: 14–21.

19.

Devine

Knapp

Sarid-Segal

et al . Payment expectations for research participation among subjects who tell the truth, subjects who conceal information, and subjects who fabricate information. Contemp Clin Trials 2015; 41: 55–61.