Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Payment for participation in clinical research: Review of proposals submitted to the ethics committees.
Marathe, Padmaja A; Tripathi, Raakhi K; Shetty, Yashashri C; Kuyare, Sunil S; Kamat, Sandhya K; Thatte, Urmila M.
Afiliación
  • Marathe PA; Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Tripathi RK; Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Shetty YC; Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Kuyare SS; Department of Microbiology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Kamat SK; Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Thatte UM; Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Perspect Clin Res ; 9(2): 64-69, 2018.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29862198
OBJECTIVE: In view of dearth of information in national and international guidelines on payment practices in research, the present study was done to find out payments for participation allowed by 3 Ethics committees (ECs) and reasons for payment. METHOD: This was a retrospective observational study which analysed research proposals reviewed by 2 institutional and 1 non-institutional ECs over a period of 2 years. The permission of ECs was obtained and confidentiality of data was maintained. RESULTS: Of the 73 studies requiring payment, 89.04% were interventional and 10.96% observational. Reimbursement of travel expenses (60%) was the major reason for payment followed by inconvenience due to participation, loss of wages and time spent. The queries raised by EC in more than 50 % of studies were related to informing patients about the payment in the informed consent document. The investigators complied with the EC requirements regarding payment (15/21) and the remaining provided explanations. The median amount of payment in pharmaceutical sponsored studies was higher compared to investigator initiated studies. Higher payments were approved by ECs on case to case basis in a few studies. The ECs did not have any policy/ standard operating procedure for payment practices. CONCLUSION: The present study first of its kind in India, demonstrated that quantum of payment was not uniform for pharmaceutical sponsored and investigator initiated studies and payments were not considered for majority of observational studies. Travel reimbursement was the most common reason for payment. There is a need to develop guidelines for determining appropriate payment/incentives to participants for specific types of research related activities.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Perspect Clin Res Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: India

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Perspect Clin Res Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: India