Payment in challenge studies: ethics, attitudes and a new payment for risk model
- PMID: 32978306
- PMCID: PMC7719900
- DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106438
Payment in challenge studies: ethics, attitudes and a new payment for risk model
Abstract
Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) research involves the infection of otherwise healthy participants with disease often for the sake of vaccine development. The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasised the urgency of enhancing CHIM research capability and the importance of having clear ethical guidance for their conduct. The payment of CHIM participants is a controversial issue involving stakeholders across ethics, medicine and policymaking with allegations circulating suggesting exploitation, coercion and other violations of ethical principles. There are multiple approaches to payment: reimbursement, wage payment and unlimited payment. We introduce a new Payment for Risk Model, which involves paying for time, pain and inconvenience and for risk associated with participation. We give philosophical arguments based on utility, fairness and avoidance of exploitation to support this. We also examine a cross-section of the UK public and CHIM experts. We found that CHIM participants are currently paid variable amounts. A representative sample of the UK public believes CHIM participants should be paid approximately triple the UK minimum wage and should be paid for the risk they endure throughout participation. CHIM experts believe CHIM participants should be paid more than double the UK minimum wage but are divided on the payment for risk. The Payment for Risk Model allows risk and pain to be accounted for in payment and could be used to determine ethically justifiable payment for CHIM participants.Although many research guidelines warn against paying large amounts or paying for risk, our empirical findings provide empirical support to the growing number of ethical arguments challenging this status quo. We close by suggesting two ways (value of statistical life or consistency with risk in other employment) by which payment for risk could be calculated.
Keywords: coercion; research ethics.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: AJP and JoO are both Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) investigators. JoO is an investigator on CHIM studies funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council & Medical Research Future Fund. AJP is a CHIM investigator and codirector of the UK MRC Hic-Vac network. AJP is Chair of UK DHSC's JCVI and is a member of the WHO’s SAGE. AJP is an NIHR Senior Investigator.
Figures


Comment in
-
Payment of COVID-19 challenge trials: underpayment is a bigger worry than overpayment.J Med Ethics. 2021 Aug;47(8):585-586. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106901. Epub 2020 Oct 12. J Med Ethics. 2021. PMID: 33046591 No abstract available.
-
Compensating for research risk: permissible but not obligatory.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):827-828. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106829. Epub 2020 Oct 13. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33051381 No abstract available.
-
Payment in challenge studies from an economics perspective.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):831-832. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106891. Epub 2020 Oct 28. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33115857 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Should practice and policy be revised to allow for risk-proportional payment to human challenge study participants?J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):835-836. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106900. Epub 2020 Nov 5. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33154089 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Commentary on 'Payment in challenge studies: ethics, attitudes and a new payment for risk model'.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):829-830. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106975. Epub 2020 Nov 5. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33154091 No abstract available.
-
On measuring attitudes about payment for research.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):833-834. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106996. Epub 2020 Nov 24. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33234545 No abstract available.
-
Fair go: pay research participants properly or not at all.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):837-839. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-107060. Epub 2020 Nov 24. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33234546 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Why continuing uncertainties are no reason to postpone challenge trials for coronavirus vaccines.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):808-812. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106501. Epub 2020 Jul 13. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 32661074 Free PMC article.
-
Exploring the acceptability of controlled human infection with SARSCoV2-a public consultation.BMC Med. 2020 Jul 7;18(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01670-2. BMC Med. 2020. PMID: 32635912 Free PMC article.
-
A Cross-sectional Survey of Public Knowledge and Perspective on Coronavirus Disease, Vaccination, and Related Research in India during the COVID-19 Pandemic.J Assoc Physicians India. 2023 Sep;71(9):19-27. doi: 10.59556/japi.71.0335. J Assoc Physicians India. 2023. PMID: 38700297
-
So much at stake: Ethical tradeoffs in accelerating SARSCoV-2 vaccine development.Vaccine. 2020 Sep 22;38(41):6381-6387. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.08.017. Epub 2020 Aug 11. Vaccine. 2020. PMID: 32826103 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Ethical Characteristics of Research Proposals Related to COVID-19 Pandemic in Nepal: A Retrospective Review.J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2021 Apr 23;19(1):148-153. doi: 10.33314/jnhrc.v19i1.3373. J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2021. PMID: 33934150 Review.
Cited by
-
Ethical acceptability of human challenge trials: Consultation with the US public and with research personnel.PLoS One. 2024 Oct 22;19(10):e0307808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307808. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39436878 Free PMC article.
-
Payment in challenge studies from an economics perspective.J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec;46(12):831-832. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106891. Epub 2020 Oct 28. J Med Ethics. 2020. PMID: 33115857 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Exploring Risks of Human Challenge Trials For COVID-19.Risk Anal. 2021 May;41(5):710-720. doi: 10.1111/risa.13726. Epub 2021 May 4. Risk Anal. 2021. PMID: 33942351 Free PMC article.
-
Engineered Mycobacterium tuberculosis triple-kill-switch strain provides controlled tuberculosis infection in animal models.Nat Microbiol. 2025 Feb;10(2):482-494. doi: 10.1038/s41564-024-01913-5. Epub 2025 Jan 10. Nat Microbiol. 2025. PMID: 39794471 Free PMC article.
-
Stopping exploitation: Properly remunerating healthcare workers for risk in the COVID-19 pandemic.Bioethics. 2021 May;35(4):372-379. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12845. Epub 2021 Feb 7. Bioethics. 2021. PMID: 33550626 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Tacket CO, Cohen MB, Wasserman SS, et al. . Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentered trial of the efficacy of a single dose of live oral cholera vaccine CVD 103-HgR in preventing cholera following challenge with Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor Inaba three months after vaccination. Infect Immun 1999;67(12):6341–5. 10.1128/IAI.67.12.6341-6345.1999 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Jin C, Gibani MM, Moore M, et al. . Efficacy and immunogenicity of a Vi-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine in the prevention of typhoid fever using a controlled human infection model of Salmonella typhi: a randomised controlled, phase 2B trial. The Lancet 2017;390(10111):2472–80. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32149-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical