title: Study participants incentives, compensation and reimbursement in resource-constrained settings.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Controversies still exists within the research fraternity on the form and level of incentives, compensation and reimbursement to study participants in resource-constrained settings. While most research activities contribute significantly to advancement of mankind, little has been considered in rewarding directly the research participants from resource-constrained areas.
  
  
  METHODS
  A study was conducted in Zimbabwe to investigate views and expectations of various stakeholders on study participation incentives, compensation and reimbursement issues. Data was collected using various methods including a survey of about 1,008 parents/guardians of school children participating in various immunological cohort studies and parasitology surveys. Community advisory boards (CABs) at 9 of the sites were also consulted. Further, information was gathered during discussions held at a basic research ethics training workshop. The workshop had 45 participants that including 40 seasoned Zimbabwean researchers and 5 international research collaborators.
  
  
  RESULTS
  About 90% (907) of the study participants and guardians expected compensation of reasonable value, in view of the researchers' value and comparison to other sites regardless of economic status of the community. During discussion with researchers at a basic ethics training workshop, about 80% (32) believed that decisions on level of compensation should be determined by the local research ethics committees. While, the few international research collaborators were of the opinion that compensation should be in accordance with local guidelines, and incentives should be in line with funding. Both the CAB members and study participants expressed that there should be a clear distinction between study incentive and compensation accorded to individual and community expectations on benefits from studies. However, CABs expressed that their suggestions on incentives and compensation are often moderated by the regulatory authorities who cite fear of unknown concerns.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Overall, both personal and community benefits need to be considered collectively in future studies to be conducted in resource-constrained communities. There is projected fear that recruitment in future may be a challenge, now that almost every community, has somehow been reached and participated in some form of studies. A major concern on reimbursement, compensation or incentives should be internationally pegged regardless of different economic status of the individuals or communities where the study is to be conducted.
authors.forename: Takafira
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Mduluza
authors.forename: Nicholas
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Midzi
authors.forename: Donold
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Duruza
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Ndebele
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000191:economics / Q000941:ethics*; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research; D032984:Ethics, Research; D005260:Female; D006295:Health Resources; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D007182:Income; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009042:Motivation; D035842:Research Subjects; D015030:Zimbabwe