ArticlePloS one2026
Ethical and social recognition of participation in drug clinical trials: French public views on financial compensation for participants.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug clinical trial participants should be fairly compensated for inconvenience while avoiding undue inducement. However, European regulations provide limited operational guidance on when compensation should be offered and how it should be determined. The INDEM3 project aims to develop a decision-support tool for sponsors and ethics committees, beginning with an assessment of exploratory public perspectives in France.
methodsAn exploratory population-based survey was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire with an estimated completion time of approximately seven minutes. A minimum of 60 individuals was targeted, with or without chronic condition or prior research experience. The questionnaire assessed general views on financial compensation and responses to three fictional drug clinical trial scenarios varying in risk, burden, and direct benefit. Distribution occurred in healthcare settings and via social networks.
resultsBetween March 2024 and January 2025, 65 responses were collected. Most respondents (75%) supported financial compensation for participation in drug clinical trials. The most frequently cited criteria were exposure to a new investigational drug (65%), invasive procedures (63%) and experiencing income lost (63%), and absence of direct personal benefit (28%). For the scenarios, the proportion of respondents supporting compensation and the median proposed amounts were as follows: Scenario 1 (no direct benefit, high burden, low uncertainty): 81%; €300 [€140-300]. Scenario 2 (some direct benefit, low burden, moderate uncertainty): 48%; €150 [€100-200]. Scenario 3 (some direct benefit, high burden and high uncertainty): 60%; €500 [€200-1,000].
conclusionRespondents in this exploratory French survey largely supported financial compensation for participation in drug clinical trials. Compensation is perceived as a proportionate ethical and social recognition of uncertainty, burden and lack of direct benefit. These findings provide an empirical basis for developing transparent tools to guide compensation decisions.
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.