Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Payments to Normal Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Trials: Avoiding Undue Influence While Distributing Fairly the Burdens of Research Participation.A. S. Iltis - 2009 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (1):68-90.
    Clinical investigators must engage in just subject recruitment and selection and avoid unduly influencing research participation. There may be tension between the practice of keeping payments to participants low to avoid undue influence and the requirements of justice when recruiting normal healthy volunteers for phase 1 drug studies. By intentionally keeping payments low to avoid unduly influenced participation, investigators, on the recommendation or insistence of institutional review boards, may be targeting or systematically recruiting healthy adult members of lower socio-economic groups (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Paying Human Subjects in Research: Where are We, How Did We Get Here, and Now What?Ari VanderWalde & Seth Kurzban - 2011 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (3):543-558.
    On November 14, 1996, an in-depth report on the recruiting and testing practices of Lilly Pharmaceuticals appeared in the Wall Street Journal. Laurie Cohen reported that most pharmaceutical companies had difficulty recruiting healthy subjects to participate in testing of “untried and potentially dangerous” drugs. These companies often had to pay subjects up to $250 a day to ensure adequate enrollment, and some even gave referral bonuses to doctors who sent potential subjects their way. Cohen then exposed how Lilly was able (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Maybe We Should Pay Them More.Sheldon Zink - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):1h-1h.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Exploitative, irresistible, and coercive offers: why research participants should be paid well or not at all.Sara Belfrage - 2016 - Journal of Global Ethics 12 (1):69-86.
    ABSTRACTThis paper begins with the assumption that it is morally problematic when people in need are offered money in exchange for research participation if the amount offered is unfair. Such offers are called ‘coercive’, and the degree of coerciveness is determined by the offer's potential to cause exploitation and its irresistibility. Depending on what view we take on the possibility to compensate for the sacrifices made by research participants, a wish to avoid ‘coercive offers’ leads to policy recommendations concerning payment (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Just Compensation: Paying Research Subjects Relative to the Risks They Bear.Jerry Menikoff - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):56-58.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Payments to Participants: Beware of the Trojan Horses.Harold Y. Vanderpool - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):58-60.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Benefits to research subjects in international trials: Do they reduce exploitation or increase undue inducement?Angela Ballantyne - 2006 - Developing World Bioethics 8 (3):178-191.
    There is an alleged tension between undue inducement and exploitation in research trials. This paper considers claims that increasing the benefits to research subjects enrolled in international, externally-sponsored clinical trials should be avoided on the grounds that it may result in the undue inducement of research subjects. This article contributes to the debate about exploitation versus undue inducement by introducing an analysis of the available empirical research into research participants' motivations and the influence of payments on research subjects' behaviour and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Rethinking Risk in Pediatric Research.Kathleen Cranley Glass & Ariella Binik - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (3):567-576.
    This article reviews four areas of pediatric research in which we have identified questionable levels of allowable risk, exceeding those foreseen by the Commission. They are the following: the categorization of increasingly risky interventions as minimal risk in a variety of protocols; the increasing number of applications for federal panel review of research not otherwise approvable because of higher projected risk levels; research on asymptomatic at risk children; and the inclusion of children and adolescents in placebo-controlled trials for participants of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Increasing the amount of payment to research subjects.D. B. Resnick - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e14-e14.
    This article discusses some ethical issues that can arise when researchers decide to increase the amount of payment offered to research subjects to boost enrollment. Would increasing the amount of payment be unfair to subjects who have already consented to participate in the study? This article considers how five different models of payment—the free market model, the wage payment model, the reimbursement model, the appreciation model, and the fair benefits model—would approach this issue. The article also considers several practical problems (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Avoiding Exploitation in Phase I Clinical Trials: More than (Un)Just Compensation.Matt Lamkin & Carl Elliott - 2018 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 46 (1):52-63.
    Lowering compensation to research subjects to protect them from “undue inducement” is a misguided attempt to shoehorn a concern about exploitation into the framework of autonomy. We suggest that oversight bodies should be less concerned about undue influence than about exploitation of subjects. Avoiding exploitation in human subjects research requires not only increasing compensation, but enhancing the dignity of research participation.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • (1 other version)Wanted—egg donors for research: A research ethics approach to donor recruitment and compensation.Angela Ballantyne & Sheryl de Lacey - 2008 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 1 (2):145-164.
    As the demand for human eggs for stem cell research increases, debate about appropriate standards for recruitment and compensation of women intensifies. In the majority of cases, the source of eggs for research is women undergoing fertility treatment requiring ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval. The principle of "just participant selection" requires that research subjects be selected from the population that stands to benefit from the research. Based on this principle, infertile women should be actively recruited to donate eggs for fertility-related (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The original sin of crowd work for human subjects research.Huichuan Xia - 2022 - Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 20 (3):374-387.
    Purpose Academic scholars have leveraged crowd work platforms such as Amazon Mechanical Turk for human subjects research for almost two decades. However, few scholars have reflected or questioned this mode of academic research. This paper aims to examine three fundamental problems of crowd work and elaborates on their lasting effects on impacting the validity and quality of human subjects research on crowd work. Design/methodology/approach` A critical analysis is conducted on the characteristics of crowd work, and three fundamental problems of crowd (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark