Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28766409›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2017

Phase 1 healthy volunteer willingness to participate and enrollment preferences.

Stephanie C Chen, Ninet Sinaii, Gabriella Bedarida, Mark A Gregorio, Ezekiel Emanuel, Christine Grady

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. "Death and Taxes": Why Financial Compensation for Research Participants is an Economic and Legal Risk.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Are Payments to Human Research Subjects Ethically Suspect?Journal of clinical research best practices · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Healthy Volunteers' Perceptions of the Benefits of Their Participation in Phase I Clinical Trials.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie C Chen1 Department of Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Ninet Sinaii2 Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Gabriella Bedarida3 Pfizer Clinical Research Unit, New Haven, CT, USA.
Mark A Gregorio3 Pfizer Clinical Research Unit, New Haven, CT, USA.
Ezekiel Emanuel4 Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Christine Grady1 Department of Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
National Institutes of Health Clinical Center · USPfizer (United States) · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Motivations for participation in phase 1 drug development trialsZIACL010534 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI GRADY, CHRISTINE P · 2010 to 2018
$0k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA CL010534
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsHealthy volunteers in phase 1 clinical trials contribute to the development of safe drugs and other biologics and accept risks and burdens without anticipated health benefits from participation. Although emerging data have shown that healthy volunteers are influenced by risk, some still worry that financial incentives lead them to take on unreasonable risk. Yet little is known about healthy volunteers' preferences and how they make choices about enrolling in research studies.

methodsWe surveyed 654 healthy volunteers at the end of their participation in a phase 1 Pfizer trial in the United States, Belgium, and Singapore to examine their reported willingness to enroll in studies of different types, with various procedures, and with possible side-effects.

resultsThe majority of respondents were willing to join many kinds of studies, but fewer were willing to participate in first-in-human vaccine studies or studies of psychiatric drugs than in other study types. With regard to procedures, a substantial proportion were unwilling to participate in studies that involved invasive procedures, such as a lumbar puncture (45.4%) and bone marrow biopsy (42.3%), but willing to participate in studies with less invasive procedures such as a computed tomography scan of the heart (86.8%), magnetic resonance imaging (87.4%), and skin allergy testing (86.8%). Although there was some variation by gender and region, the majority were willing to participate in studies with side-effects like pain (80%) or nausea and vomiting (64%), but only a minority were willing to join if the research drug would result in their having a one in a million chance of death (34.4%), a small chance of kidney damage (16.7%), or influence how their mind works (23.2%; Figure 4).

conclusionOur results suggest that healthy volunteers are willing to participate in a wide range of types of phase 1 clinical trials, and express preferences for low risk and familiar studies and study procedures, preferences which are partially affected by offers of payment.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdultClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansInformed ConsentMalePatient PreferencePatient SelectionRisk AssessmentSurveys and Questionnairesdecision-makinghealthy volunteersinformed consentPhase 1 clinical trialsresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID28766409
PMCPMC6010312
OpenAlexW2763537812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.