Sponsors, researchers and Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are often wary about payments in research participation, citing concerns about coercion and undue influence, whether real or perceived, and have avoided payments that are “too high.” New research on how people make decisions about research participation, and new approaches to this question, bring a new perspective; are payments to participants actually too low? This paper explores this question, and whether we should, in fact, worry much less about restricting compensation for research participants.Enter content here
Request a Genetics in Clinical Trials training session
What You'll LearnMost Recent Flipbooks
Clinical Research Trends & Insights for 2020
16 industry experts share shifts and trends that will inform clinical research in 2020 and beyond.
Advances in Oncology Extend Lives, but Lead to New Safety Considerations for Sponsors and Investigators
From cardiovascular adverse events to complex dosing regimens, oncology trials present unique safety-related considerations.
The Most Important Voice Is Missing: The Case For Including Patient Insights In Protocol Design
Something Has to Give: The Current Unsustainable Approach to Safety Reporting Puts Trials and Patients at Risk
Something Has to Give: The Current Unsustainable Approach to Safety Reporting Puts Trials and Patients at Risk
The Power to Pivot: Decoding CNS Trials with Data Analytics
In this interview, Jesse Kooker, MPH, VP of Clinical Data Sciences at WCG's MedAvante-ProPhase, looks at the clinical development industry through the lens of data analytics.
Site-specific, Patient-centered and Whip-smart: Enrollment Assistants Adapt to a Shifting Landscape
Addressing Suggestibility as a Psychological Phenomenon in Clinical Trials
It is important to understand patient perspectives and to anticipate how subjects in research studies may be impacted by the presence of digital tools, devices, and mobile health applications