Show simple item record

dc.creatorIltis, Ana S.en
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-08T23:09:08Zen
dc.date.available2016-01-08T23:09:08Zen
dc.date.created2009-02en
dc.date.issued2009-02en
dc.identifierdoi:10.1093/jmp/jhn036en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medicine and Philosophy 2009 February; 34(1): 68-90en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Payments+to+normal+healthy+volunteers+in+phase+1+trials:+avoiding+undue+influence+while+distributing+fairly+the+burdens+of+research+participation&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy+&volume=34&issue=1&date=2009-02&au=Iltis,+Ana+S.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhn036en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/951827en
dc.description.abstractClinical investigators must engage in just subject recruitment and selection and avoid unduly influencing research participation. There may be tension between the practice of keeping payments to participants low to avoid undue influence and the requirements of justice when recruiting normal healthy volunteers for phase 1 drug studies. By intentionally keeping payments low to avoid unduly influenced participation, investigators, on the recommendation or insistence of institutional review boards, may be targeting or systematically recruiting healthy adult members of lower socio-economic groups for participation in phase 1 studies. Investigators are at risk of routinely failing to fulfill the obligation of justice, which prohibits the systematic targeting and recruiting of subjects for reasons unrelated to the nature of the study. Insofar as we take seriously the obligation to engage in just subject recruitment and selection, I argue that we must acknowledge the implications low payments might have for subject recruitment and selection and examine the effect of low payments. If low payments de facto target the less well-off for phase 1 studies, we must defend the priority ranking of the obligation to avoid undue influence over the obligation of justice or adopt an alternative recruitment approach. This paper identifies a number of alternatives to the current system of low-value payments to research participants.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceeweb:323458en
dc.subjectAlternativesen
dc.subjectClinical Investigatorsen
dc.subjectInstitutional Review Boardsen
dc.subjectInvestigatorsen
dc.subjectJusticeen
dc.subjectNatureen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subjectReviewen
dc.subjectRisken
dc.subjectVolunteersen
dc.subject.classificationPhilosophical Ethicsen
dc.subject.classificationHuman Experimentationen
dc.subject.classificationEconomics of Health Careen
dc.titlePayments to Normal Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Trials: Avoiding Undue Influence While Distributing Fairly the Burdens of Research Participationen
dc.provenanceCitation prepared by the Library and Information Services group of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University for the ETHXWeb database.en
dc.provenanceCitation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named EWEB hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection EthxWeb hosted by DigitalGeorgetown.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2023 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885