Show simple item record

Research Participation by Low‐Income and Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups: How Payment May Change the Balance

dc.contributor.authorWalter, Jennifer K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBurke, James F.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Matthew M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-11-01T19:01:10Z
dc.date.available2014-11-03T16:20:38Zen_US
dc.date.issued2013-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationWalter, Jennifer K.; Burke, James F.; Davis, Matthew M. (2013). "Research Participation by Low‐Income and Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups: How Payment May Change the Balance." Clinical and Translational Science 6(5): 363-371. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/100336>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1752-8054en_US
dc.identifier.issn1752-8062en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/100336
dc.description.abstractMinorities are underenrolled in clinical research trials, and one‐third of trials are underenrolled overall. The role of payment has not been studied at the national level as an explanation for enrollment patterns. Our objective was to examine the distribution of self‐reported previous research participation across different sociodemographic groups; to assess the public's perception of fair payment for a low‐risk medicine trial and the association between requested payment and sociodemographic characteristics; to estimate the amount of payment for a medication trial to achieve proportional representation of minorities and different socioeconomic groups. This was a cross‐sectional study with nationally representative data collected in 2011 by the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health. To determine the relationship between perceived fair payment and individual‐level characteristics, we used multivariable linear regression. With 60% participation rate, in a sample of 2,150 respondents 11% ( n = 221) of the sample had previously participated in medical research. Requested payment differed significantly by racial/ethnic group with Hispanics requesting more payment than non‐Hispanic whites (0.37 [95%CI 0.02, 0.72]) In contrast to payment at $49, $149, and $249, payment at $349 yielded proportional representation of racial/ethnic minority groups. Hispanics requested higher payment for research participation, suggesting a possible explanation for their underenrollment.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherUS Government Printing Officeen_US
dc.subject.otherResearchen_US
dc.subject.otherPaymenten_US
dc.subject.otherIncomeen_US
dc.subject.otherRaceen_US
dc.subject.otherHispanicen_US
dc.subject.otherPublicen_US
dc.titleResearch Participation by Low‐Income and Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups: How Payment May Change the Balanceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPharmacy and Pharmacologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100336/1/cts12084.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/cts.12084en_US
dc.identifier.sourceClinical and Translational Scienceen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRipley E, Macrina F, Markowitz M, Gennings C. Why do we pay? A national survey of investigators and IRB chairpersons. J Empirical Res Hum Res Ethics 2010; 5 ( 3 ): 43 – 56.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCorbie‐Smith G, Miller W, Fransohoff D. Interpretations of ‘appropriate’ minority inclusion in clinical research. Am J Med. 2004; 116 ( 4 ): 249 – 252.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMurthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race‐, sex‐, and age‐based disparities. JAMA. 2004; 291 ( 22 ): 2720 – 2726.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDignan M, Evans M, Kratt P, Pollack LA, Pisu M, Smith JL, Prayor‐Patterson H, Houston P, Watson C, Hullett S, Martin MY. Recruitment of low income, predominantly minority cancer survivors to a randomized trial of the I Can Cope cancer education program. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2011; 22 ( 3 ): 912 – 924.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCryder C, London J, Volpp KG, Loewenstein G. Informative inducement: study payment as a signal risk. Soc Sci Med. 2010; 70 ( 3 ): 455 – 464.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern S, Karlawish JH, Casarett D, Berlin JA, Asch DA. Empirical assessment of whether moderate payments are undue or unjust inducements for participation in clinical trials. Arch Inter Med. 2004; 164 ( 7 ): 801 – 803.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCzarny MJ, Kass NE, Flexner C, Carson KA, Myers RK, Fuchs EJ. Payment to healthy volunteers in clinical research: the research subject's perspective. Clin Pharmacol Therapeut 2010; 87 ( 3 ): 286 – 293.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFestinger DS, Marlowe DB, Croft JR, Dugosh KL, Mastro NK, Lee PA, Dematteo DS, Patapis NS. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation ? Drug Alcohol Depend 2005; 78 ( 3 ): 275 – 281.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFestinger DS, Marlowe DB, Dugosh KL, Croft JR, Arabia PL. Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow‐up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion. Drug Alcohol Depend 2008; 96 ( 1–2 ): 128 – 135.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCampbell MK, Snowdon C, Francis D, Elbourne D, McDonald AM, Knight R, Entwistle V, Garcia J, Roberts I, Grant A, Grant A; STEPS group. Recruitment to randomised trials: strategies for trial enrollment and participation study. The STEPS study. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11 ( 48 ): iii, ix – 105.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceElliot C, Abadie R. Exploiting a research underclass in phase I clinical trials. New England J Med. 2008; 358: 2316 – 2317.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDickert N, Grady C. What's the price of a research subject? Approaches to payment for research participation. New England J Med. 1999; 341 ( 3 ): 198 – 203.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMacklin R. “ Due” and “undue” inducements. IRB 1981; 3: 1 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLargent EA, Grady C, Miller FG, Wertheimer A. Money, coercion, and undue inducement: attitudes about payments to research participants. IRB. 2012; 34 ( 1 ): 1 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDennis J. Summary of KnowledgePanel Design. 2010; Available at: www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp/reviewer‐info.html. Accessed May 14, 2012.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMacy M, Clark S, Freed GL, Butchart AT, Singer DC, Sasson C, Meurer WJ, Davis MM. Carpooling and booster seats: a National Survey of Parents. Pediatrics 2012; 129 ( 2 ): 290 – 298.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTarini B, Singer D, Clark S, Davis M. Parents' interest in predictive genetic testing for their children when a disease has no treatment. Pediatrics 2009; 124 ( 3 ): e432.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTarini B, Singer D, Clark SJ, Davis MM. Parents' concern about their own and their children's genetic disease risk: potential effects of family history vs genetic test results. Arch Pediatr Adoles Med. 2008; 162 ( 11 ): 1079 – 1083.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFreed GL, Dunham K, Clark S. Perspective and preferences among the general public regarding physician selection and board certification. J Pediatr. 2010; 156 ( 5 ): 841 – 845.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDempsey A, Singer D, Clark S. Adolescent preventive health care: what do parents want ? J Pediatr. 2009; 155 ( 5 ): 689 – 694.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrady C, Dickert N, Jawetz T, Gensler G, Emanuel E. An analysis of U.S. practices of paying research participants. Contemp Clin Trials. 2005; 26 ( 3 ): 365 – 375.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSwanson GM, Ward AJ. Recruiting minorities into clinical trials: toward a participant‐friendly system. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995; 87 ( 23 ): 1747 – 1759.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFord M, Havstad S, Davis S. A randomized trial of recruitment methods for older African American men in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. Clin Trials. 2004; 1 ( 4 ): 343 – 351.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2010 National Healthcare Disparities Report 2010. AHRQ Publication 11–0005. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/qrdr10.htm Accessed May 16, 2012.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThe Belmont Report: The Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1978; OS publication 78–0012.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNIH Guidelines on the Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research. Vol. 59. Washington, DC: Federal Register; 1994: 14508 – 14513.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.