Heterogeneity in IRB Policies with Regard to Disclosures about Payment for Participation in Recruitment Materials

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 42 (3):375-382 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The payment of human subjects is an area where Institutional Review Boards have wide discretion. Although the “Common Rule” requires the provision of full information to human research participants to secure valid consent, the Rule is silent on the issue of payment. Still, some federal agencies offer guidance on the matter. For example, the National Science Foundation cautions that high payments for risky research “may induce a needy participant to take a risk that they normally would prefer not to take.” For research under its purview, the Food and Drug Administration guidance provides that “[a]dvertisements may state that subjects will be paid, but should not emphasize the payment or the amount to be paid, by such means as larger or bold type.” One might read the FDA guidance to permit the advertisement for human subjects to state the specific amount of payment, as long as it is not emphasized.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Payment for research participation: a coercive offer?A. Wertheimer & F. G. Miller - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):389-392.
An Over-view of Online Recruitment: The Case of Public and.Nuran Ally Mwasha - 2013 - European Journal of Business and Management 5 (32):11-21.
A Typology of Corporate Environmental Policies.Michel Dion - 1998 - Environmental Ethics 20 (2):151-162.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-02-04

Downloads
14 (#993,927)

6 months
7 (#437,422)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?