Paying research subjects: an analysis of current policies.
BACKGROUND
Few data are available on guidelines used by research organizations to make decisions about paying subjects.


OBJECTIVE
To analyze existing guidance regarding payment of research subjects and to identify common characteristics and areas for further research.


METHODS
Descriptive content analysis of policies.


METHODS
Written policies and rules of thumb about paying subjects from 32 U.S. research organizations.


RESULTS
Of 32 organizations, 37.5% had written guidelines about paying subjects; all but 1 reported having rules of thumb. Few (18.8%) were able to provide a confident estimate of the proportion of studies that pay subjects. Organizations reported that investigators and institutional review boards make payment decisions and that both healthy and ill subjects in some studies are paid for their time (87%), for inconvenience (84%), for travel (68%), as incentive (58%), or for incurring risk (32%). Most organizations require that payment be prorated (84%) and described in the consent document (94%).


CONCLUSIONS
Most organizations pay some research subjects, but few have written policies on payment. Because investigators and institutional review boards make payment decisions with little specific guidance, standards vary.
Dickert
Neal
N
W.G. Magnuson Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-1156, USA.
Emanuel
Ezekiel
E
Grady
Christine
C
D000329:Advertising / Q000592:standards; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards; D003284:Contract Services / Q000592:standards; D004345:Drug Industry / Q000592:standards; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research / Q000592:standards; D017408:Guidelines as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D012052:Reimbursement, Incentive; D035842:Research Subjects; D014481:United States