ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
Is It a Bribe? Research Personnels' Perceptions of the Ethical Aspects of Financial Compensation to Healthy Volunteers in Prevention Trials in Tanzania.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFinancial compensation may be perceived as a catalyst to increase the recruitment and retention of healthy volunteers in clinical trials but also potentially as a form of undue inducement. The ethical guidelines in Tanzania, while helpful, are not clear on what is considered reasonable compensation for healthy volunteers and the extent to which it influences participation. This study aimed to explore research personnels' perceptions of the ethical aspects of financial compensation to healthy volunteers participating in prevention trials in Tanzania.
methodsQualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted in Tanzania with a purposive sample of 36 research personnel with different project roles ranging from principal investigators (PIs) to study staff on six prevention trials. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was performed.
resultsMost research personnel were physicians (64%) and male (67%) with a mean age of 48 years. Three qualitative themes were identified: ethical justifications for financial compensation, ethical concerns about financial compensation and fair compensation as income. Most Tanzanian research personnel were more aligned with the view that financial compensation is an ethical responsibility in respecting the value of a healthy volunteer's time and effort, especially for those who face barriers to participation, rather than being a bribe. However, there were those who raised ethical concerns about financial compensation that included perceptions of bribing low-income earners and increased misperceptions of trial activities. Research personnel also indicated that the specific amount of financial compensation has ethical implications. Amounts that were either too much or too little were viewed as unethical, whereas a modest rate was perceived as ethical.
conclusionsPaying healthy volunteers is a measure of respect and supported by the national Tanzanian research guidelines. However, a reevaluation of these research ethical guidelines to redefine reasonable, fair and just financial compensation, especially for those who face significant barriers to participation, would continue to respect healthy volunteers and provide regional guidance for researchers within the country.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.