Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 4;8(1):e204.
doi: 10.1017/cts.2024.650. eCollection 2024.

Ethical considerations for respectful research participant payment processes

Devan M Duenas  1 , Elliott Mark Weiss  1   2   3 , Benjamin S Wilfond  1   2 , Stephanie A Kraft  4
Affiliations

Ethical considerations for respectful research participant payment processes

Devan M Duenas et al. J Clin Transl Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Researchers and research organizations acknowledge the importance of paying research participants but often overlook the process of providing participant payments as a locus for improving equity and inclusion in clinical research. In this conceptual paper, we argue that participants' lived experiences and social context should be recognized and respected when developing these processes.

Methods: We consider how participant payment processes that require specific payment types, delay the timing of payment, or require sharing sensitive information may impose barriers to equitable research. Building on findings from empirical research of participants' perspectives on respect in research and a relational ethics framework of person-oriented research ethics, we explore how researchers and research organizations can better demonstrate respect through the research participation payment process.

Results: We propose five considerations for demonstrating respect when providing payment: (1) practice cultural humility, (2) be mindful of socioeconomic factors, (3) be flexible, (4) be transparent, and (5) maintain open communication. These considerations are intended to address the lack of existing ethical guidance around the process for participant payments and promote more inclusive clinical research. We provide a set of sample questions for research teams to consider how they could modify their payment processes to better demonstrate respect.

Conclusions: By better demonstrating respect for participants when providing payment, researchers can work toward ensuring that their research procedures are more inclusive, respond to the needs of diverse communities, and result in more equitable relationships with participants.

Keywords: Research ethics; equity; payment; person-oriented ethics; respect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

    1. Hindorff LA, Bonham VL, Brody LC, et al. Prioritizing diversity in human genomics research. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19:175–185. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2017.89 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jooma S, Hahn MJ, Hindorff LA, Bonham VL. Defining and achieving health equity in genomic medicine. Ethn Dis. 2019;21:173–178. doi: 10.18865/ed.29.S1.173 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Landry LG, Ali N, Williams DR, Rehm HL, Bonham VL. Lack of diversity in genomic databases is a barrier to translating precision medicine research into practice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2018;37:780–785. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1595 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weiss EM, Porter KM, Sullivan TR, et al. Equity concerns across pediatric research recruitment: an analysis of research staff interviews. Acad Pediatr. 2024;24(2):318–329. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2023.06.032 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gilmore-Bykovskyi A, Jackson JD, Wilkins CH. The urgency of justice in research: beyond COVID-19. Trends Mol Med. 2021;27:97–100. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2020.11.004 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources