ArticlePloS one2025
Does financial compensation matter for research participation in prevention trials in Tanzania? Perspectives of healthy volunteers.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFinancial compensation is an important aspect of respect for people enrolled in clinical research, yet continues to raise ethical questions. Respondents' characteristics, shaped by contextual and geographic factors, may influence perceptions of the ethical implications of financial compensation. This study explored the relationship between respondents' characteristics and their ethical perspective on the role of financial compensation in prevention trials in Tanzania. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional survey of 537 participants from two prevention studies within Tanzania was conducted. Participants were eligible if they participated in either the HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Vaccine Trial (PrEPVacc) trial or a non-inferiority trial of low-dose compared to standard high-dose calcium supplementation in pregnancy in Tanzania. A questionnaire was used to collect participants' sociodemographic characteristics and motivating reasons for research participation. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics for all variables. The chi-square test was used to assess associations between categorical demographic characteristics and binary outcomes scores. Modified Poisson regression models were employed to examine predictors of positive or negative perspectives for each outcome. The P value of < 0.05 was used to ascertain the significant association between the variables.
resultsMost participants (82.5%) were young adults between the ages of 18-28 years, married or cohabiting (60.7%), and self-employed (55.9%). All participants in the cohort were female. Key motivations for research participation included medical follow-up (96.8%), quality information (94.4%), and disease control (92.2%). The majority also reported feeling a duty to participate (90.5%) with 50.1% indicating that they felt an obligation to the person who requested their participation. More than a third (36.9%) wanted to receive an incentive and reimbursement (38.7%) for out-of-pocket expenses. Financial compensation was a less common motivator among married or cohabiting participants compared to single individuals (APR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.42-0.71, p < 0.001). Participants with primary education were also less likely to report financial compensation motivations compared to those with no formal education (APR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.78, p < 0.001). Also, participants who had taken part in two or more trials had significantly higher non-financial participation motivations compared to those with only one research experience (p < 0.001).
conclusionFinancial compensation matters to certain participant subgroups, but its role varies. While some value monetary benefits, others prioritize altruism and trust in research oversight. A balanced, transparent compensation framework is needed to address financial needs while maintaining ethical integrity.
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.