Offering Payment in Clinical Research: Enrolling Individuals With or at Risk for Opioid Use Disorder

Abstract

Offering payment is an important means of facilitating research participation. Yet, offers of payment raise ethical challenges that may be heightened when prospective participants suffer from or are at risk for opioid use disorder (OUD). We surveyed principal investigators (PIs) conducting research in this population to characterize the relative importance they assign to various ethical and practical factors when designing offers of payment and also analyzed descriptions of payment in both their study advertisements and consent forms. Overall, we found that, despite literature suggesting heightened ethical concerns for this population, practical factors related to payment were more influential for PIs than either ethical factors or factors unique to individuals with or at risk for OUD. Our findings can help inform the development of ethical, effective recruitment and retention strategies for research in this population.

Keywords

research ethics payment opioid substance use disorder advertisement consent

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

McNair

(2018). Ethical issues in research involving participants with opioid use disorder. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 52(3), 280–284.

Anderson

E. E.

DuBois

J. M.

(2007). The need for evidence-based research ethics: A review of the substance abuse literature. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 86(2-3), 95–105.

Bell

Salmon

(2012). Good intentions and dangerous assumptions: Research ethics committees and illicit drug use research. Research Ethics, 8(4), 191–199.

Bentley

J. P.

Thacker

P. G.

(2004). The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30, 293–298.

Bowen

G. A.

(2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.

Buchanan

Khoshnood

Stopka

Shaw

Santelices

Singer

(2002). Ethical dilemmas created by the criminalization of status behaviors: Case examples from ethnographic field research with injection drug users. Health Education & Behavior, 29(1), 30–42.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Module 5: Assessing and addressing Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/training/oud/accessible/index.html

DuBois

J. M.

(2015). Crossing a boundary? Monitor on Psychology, 46(2), Article 70.

Dugosh

K. L.

Festinger

D. S.

Croft

J. R.

Marlowe

D. B.

(2010). Measuring coercion to participate in research within a doubly vulnerable population: Initial development of the Coercion Assessment Scale. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethic, 5(1), 93–102.

10.

Emanuel

E. J.

(2005). Undue inducement: Nonsense on stilts? American Journal of Bioethics, 5(5), 9–13.

11.

Festinger

D. S.

Dugosh

K. L.

(2012). Paying substance abusers in research studies: Where does the money go? The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 38(1), 43–48.

12.

Festinger

D. S.

Marlowe

D. B.

Croft

J. R.

Dugosh

K. L.

Mastro

N. K.

Lee

P. A.

DeMatteo

D. S.

Patapis

N. S.

(2005). Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 78(3), 275–281.

13.

Festinger

D. S.

Marlowe

D. B.

Dugosh

K. L.

Croft

J. R.

Arabia

P. L.

(2008). Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow-up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96(1), 128–135.

14.

Food and Drug Administration. (1998). Information sheet: Recruiting study subjects. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/recruiting-study-subjects

15.

Fry

Dwyer

(2001). For love or money? An exploratory study of why injecting drug users participate in research. Addiction, 96(9), 1319–1325.

16.

Fry

C. L.

Hall

Ritter

Jenkinson

(2006). The ethics of paying drug users who participate in research: A review and practical recommendations. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(4), 21–35.

17.

Gelinas

Largent

E. A.

Cohen

I. G.

Kornetsky

Bierer

B. E.

Lynch

H. F.

(2018a). A framework for ethical payment to research participants. The New England Journal of Medicine, 378(8), 766.

18.

Gelinas

Lynch

H. F.

Largent

E. A.

Shachar

Cohen

I. G.

Bierer

B. E.

(2018b). Truth in advertising: Disclosure of participant payment in research recruitment materials. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 52(3), 268–274.

19.

Grady

(2005). Payment of clinical research subjects. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 115(7), 1681–1687.

20.

Haffajee

R. L.

Frank

R. G.

(2018). Making the opioid public health emergency effective. JAMA Psychiatry, 75(8), 767–768.

21.

Halpern

S. D.

Karlawish

J. H.

Berlin

J. A.

(2002). The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. JAMA, 288(3), 358–362.

22.

Halpern

S. D.

Karlawish

J. H.

Casarett

Berlin

J. A.

Asch

D. A.

(2004). Empirical assessment of whether moderate payments are undue or unjust inducements for participation in clinical trials. Archives of Internal Medicine, 164(7), 801–803.

23.

Internal Revenue Service. (n.d.). Instructions for form 1099-MISC (2019). https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1099msc

24.

Klitzman

(2012). How IRBs view and make decisions about coercion and undue influence. Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(4), 224–229.

25.

Largent

E. A.

Emanuel

E. J.

Lynch

H. F.

(2019a). Filthy lucre or fitting offer? Understanding worries about payments to research participants. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19(9), 1–4.

26.

Largent

E. A.

Grady

Miller

F. G.

Wertheimer

(2012a). Misconceptions about coercion and undue influence: Reflections on the views of IRB members. Bioethics, 27(9), 500–507.

27.

Largent

E. A.

Grady

Miller

F. G.

Wertheimer

(2012b). Money, coercion, and undue inducement: A survey of attitudes about payments to research participants. IRB, 34(1), 1–8.

28.

Largent

E. A.

Heffernan

K. G.

Joffe

Lynch

H. F.

(2019b). Paying clinical trial participants: Legal risks and mitigation strategies. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.19.00250

29.

Largent

E. A.

Lynch

H. F.

(2017a). Paying research participants: Regulatory uncertainty, conceptual confusion, and a path forward. Yale Journal of Health Policy Law & Ethics, 17(1), 61–141.

30.

Largent

E. A.

Lynch

H. F.

(2017b). Paying research participants: The outsized influence of “undue influence.” IRB, 39(4), 1–9.

31.

Lynch

H. F.

Gelinas

Largent

E. A.

(2018). Mutual obligations in research and withholding payment from deceptive participants. The American Journal of Bioethics, 18(4), 85–87.

32.

Lynch

H. F.

Joffe

Thirumurthy

Xie

Largent

E. A.

(2019). Association between financial incentives and participant deception about study eligibility. JAMA Network Open, 2(1), Article e187355.

33.

Lynch

H. F.

Largent

E. A.

Zarin

D. A.

(2017). Reaping the bounty of publicly available clinical trial consent forms. IRB, 39(6), 10–15.

34.

Macklin

(1981). On paying money to research subjects: “due” and “undue” inducements. IRB, 3(5), 1–6.

35.

Morán-Sánchez

Luna

Sánchez-Muñoz

Aguilera-Alcaraz

Pérez-Cárceles

M. D.

(2016). Decision-making capacity for research participation among addicted people: A cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Ethics, 17, Article 3.

36.

Neale

Tompkins

C. N.

McDonald

Strang

(2018). Improving recruitment to pharmacological trials for illicit opioid use: Findings from a qualitative focus group study. Addiction, 113(6), 1066–1076.

37.

Office for Human Research Protections. (n.d.). FAQ: What does it mean to minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence?. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/guidance/faq/informed-consent/index.html

38.

O’Leary

(2014). The essential guide to doing your research project (2nd ed.). Sage.

39.

Reynolds

G. L.

Fisher

D. G.

Cagle

H. H.

Johnson

M. E.

(1999). The role of employment cycles and incentives in the recruitment of drug users. In Levy

J. A.

Stephens

R. C.

McBride

D. C.

(Eds.), Emergent issues in the field of drug abuse (pp. 289–300). Emerald Group Publishing.

40.

Ripley

Macrina

Markowitz

Gennings

(2010). Why do we pay? A national survey of investigators and IRB chairpersons. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5(3), 43–56.

41.

Rosenheck

(1997). Disability payments and chemical dependence: Conflicting values and uncertain effects. Psychiatric Services, 48, 789–791.

42.

Schonfeld

T. L.

Brown

J. S.

Weniger

Gordon

(2003). Research involving the homeless: Arguments against payment-in-kind (PinK). IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 25(5), 17–20.

43.

Seddon

(2005). Paying drug users to take part in research: Justice, human rights and business perspectives on the use of incentive payments. Addiction Research & Theory, 13(2), 101–109.

44.

Shaner

Eckman

T. A.

Roberts

L. J.

Wilkins

J. N.

Tucker

D. E.

Tsuang

J. W.

Mintz

(1995). Disability income, cocaine use, and repeated hospitalization among schizophrenic cocaine abusers—a government-sponsored revolving door? New England Journal of Medicine, 333(12), 777–783.

45.

Slomka

McCurdy

Ratliff

E. A.

Timpson

Williams

M. L.

(2007). Perceptions of financial payment for research participation among African-American drug users in HIV studies. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22(10), 1403–1409.

46.

Wertheimer

Miller

F. G.

(2008). Payment for research participation: A coercive offer? Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(5), 389–392.

47.

Wright

Robertson

(2014). Heterogeneity in IRB policies with regard to disclosures about payment for participation in recruitment materials. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 42(3), 375–382.

48.

Wright

Klee

Reid

(1998). Interviewing illicit drug users: Observations from the field. Addiction Research, 6(6), 517–535.