Opinions on payments to participants in research

Discussion in 'Trial design including bias, placebo effect' started by Andy, Nov 20, 2023.

?

What is your position on payments to participants in research?

  1. I'm for it

    13 vote(s)
    43.3%
  2. I'm against it

    1 vote(s)
    3.3%
  3. It depends

    16 vote(s)
    53.3%
  1. Kitty

    Kitty Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,919
    Location:
    UK
    I'm sorry if it sounded as if I was correcting you, I didn't mean to!

    It's surprisingly hard to describe the difference between a legal contract or obligation (which could be defined as work), and a one-off private arrangement with no contract or obligation on either side (which may not meet the definition of work).
     
  2. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,488
    Location:
    Australia
    I voted "It depends".

    I certainly think participants should have their costs covered.

    Beyond that gets problematic because potentially perverse incentives start coming into play.
     
    Trish, Andy, bobbler and 1 other person like this.
  3. shak8

    shak8 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,292
    Location:
    California
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2023
    Kitty, Trish, Andy and 1 other person like this.
  4. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,305
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Perhaps in America, I'm not so sure elsewhere.
     
    Kitty, shak8, Dolphin and 2 others like this.
  5. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,316
    I remember hearing that people in the US are paid to donate blood. In my country and I think a lot of others, it is unpaid.
     
    Kitty, shak8, Peter Trewhitt and 3 others like this.
  6. shak8

    shak8 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,292
    Location:
    California
    Podcast on the 900 for-profit blood plasma donation centers in the US

    https://www.npr.org/2021/05/14/996921658/blood-money
    There is a shortage of blood plasma which is essential for treatment of immunodeficiency diseases and in treatment of cancers, etc.
    The US exports blood plasma globally. Good bit from Brazilian doc who says the payment of donors is a non-issue. He's concerned with keeping patients alive.

    However, whole blood donors are not paid in essence:
    https://www.statnews.com/2016/01/22/paid-plasma-not-blood/
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2023
  7. ItsMERJD

    ItsMERJD Established Member

    Messages:
    16
    Quoted this bit, but you're right in that it very much depends on status, amounts, and who your benefits assessor is sometimes. We've seen cases where folks receiving some Tesco vouchers have had it seen as income and taking them over their weekly threshold on UC, which resulted in benefits sanctions. It's a really difficult area for us to navigate as there doesn't seem to be a huge deal of consistency in the UK, even with some good work being done by NIHR and others. We're also peripherally aware HMRC seem to be tightening up on whether research involvement is considered income re: self-assessment, too, which further muddies the waters. We (workplace) have to take that position of advising people to seek financial advice - but not sure how realistic that is given that even the most dedicated rep is unlikely to be earning the sorts of money that you can spare for independent financial support!

    It really does make things more difficult than they need to be.
     

Share This Page