Commentary: Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting.

Mark A. Hall, Joëlle Y. Friedman, Nancy M P King, Kevin P. Weinfurt, Kevin A. Schulman, Jeremy Sugarman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Paying more for clinical research than the cost of doing the work may create a conflict of interest that could lead to overzealous recruitment, putting participants and scientific integrity at risk. Thus, although various policies prohibit "finder's fees" simply for recruiting patients, paying the actual costs for research is permissible. Whereas industry-sponsored research routinely pays for the costs of each patient enrolled, the line between reasonable and excessive costs merits more attention. In academic medical centers (AMCs), institutional review boards and conflict of interest committees usually are not involved in reviewing research budgets to determine whether per capita payments are excessive. Also, the costs for clinical services in research are not standardized. Instead, budgets are negotiated both internally, among departments within research institutions, and externally, between researchers and sponsors. Sometimes, rates paid by sponsors exceed what researchers usually receive or are actually paid for particular services, generating a surplus. Nevertheless, the authors see only limited cause for concern because, at the AMCs with which the authors are familiar, any monetary surplus generally remains within the research enterprise to cover unanticipated budget shortfalls or to support research staff in the future during lean times. In addition, the surplus from research budgets is not shared directly with individual investigators. However, further investigation is needed to determine whether practices outside AMCs pose greater concerns.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1554-1556
Number of pages3
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume85
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Clinical Trials
Costs and Cost Analysis
costs
Research
Budgets
budget
Conflict of Interest
conflict of interest
Research Personnel
industry research
Fees and Charges
Research Ethics Committees
fee
integrity
Industry
staff
cause

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Hall, M. A., Friedman, J. Y., King, N. M. P., Weinfurt, K. P., Schulman, K. A., & Sugarman, J. (2010). Commentary: Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting. Academic Medicine, 85(10), 1554-1556.

Commentary : Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting. / Hall, Mark A.; Friedman, Joëlle Y.; King, Nancy M P; Weinfurt, Kevin P.; Schulman, Kevin A.; Sugarman, Jeremy.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 85, No. 10, 10.2010, p. 1554-1556.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hall, MA, Friedman, JY, King, NMP, Weinfurt, KP, Schulman, KA & Sugarman, J 2010, 'Commentary: Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting.', Academic Medicine, vol. 85, no. 10, pp. 1554-1556.
Hall MA, Friedman JY, King NMP, Weinfurt KP, Schulman KA, Sugarman J. Commentary: Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting. Academic Medicine. 2010 Oct;85(10):1554-1556.
Hall, Mark A. ; Friedman, Joëlle Y. ; King, Nancy M P ; Weinfurt, Kevin P. ; Schulman, Kevin A. ; Sugarman, Jeremy. / Commentary : Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting. In: Academic Medicine. 2010 ; Vol. 85, No. 10. pp. 1554-1556.
@article{a1e25716031348dfb779c9602bc2dd42,
title = "Commentary: Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting.",
abstract = "Paying more for clinical research than the cost of doing the work may create a conflict of interest that could lead to overzealous recruitment, putting participants and scientific integrity at risk. Thus, although various policies prohibit {"}finder's fees{"} simply for recruiting patients, paying the actual costs for research is permissible. Whereas industry-sponsored research routinely pays for the costs of each patient enrolled, the line between reasonable and excessive costs merits more attention. In academic medical centers (AMCs), institutional review boards and conflict of interest committees usually are not involved in reviewing research budgets to determine whether per capita payments are excessive. Also, the costs for clinical services in research are not standardized. Instead, budgets are negotiated both internally, among departments within research institutions, and externally, between researchers and sponsors. Sometimes, rates paid by sponsors exceed what researchers usually receive or are actually paid for particular services, generating a surplus. Nevertheless, the authors see only limited cause for concern because, at the AMCs with which the authors are familiar, any monetary surplus generally remains within the research enterprise to cover unanticipated budget shortfalls or to support research staff in the future during lean times. In addition, the surplus from research budgets is not shared directly with individual investigators. However, further investigation is needed to determine whether practices outside AMCs pose greater concerns.",
author = "Hall, {Mark A.} and Friedman, {Jo{\"e}lle Y.} and King, {Nancy M P} and Weinfurt, {Kevin P.} and Schulman, {Kevin A.} and Jeremy Sugarman",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "1554--1556",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Commentary

T2 - Per capita payments in clinical trials: reasonable costs versus bounty hunting.

AU - Hall, Mark A.

AU - Friedman, Joëlle Y.

AU - King, Nancy M P

AU - Weinfurt, Kevin P.

AU - Schulman, Kevin A.

AU - Sugarman, Jeremy

PY - 2010/10

Y1 - 2010/10

N2 - Paying more for clinical research than the cost of doing the work may create a conflict of interest that could lead to overzealous recruitment, putting participants and scientific integrity at risk. Thus, although various policies prohibit "finder's fees" simply for recruiting patients, paying the actual costs for research is permissible. Whereas industry-sponsored research routinely pays for the costs of each patient enrolled, the line between reasonable and excessive costs merits more attention. In academic medical centers (AMCs), institutional review boards and conflict of interest committees usually are not involved in reviewing research budgets to determine whether per capita payments are excessive. Also, the costs for clinical services in research are not standardized. Instead, budgets are negotiated both internally, among departments within research institutions, and externally, between researchers and sponsors. Sometimes, rates paid by sponsors exceed what researchers usually receive or are actually paid for particular services, generating a surplus. Nevertheless, the authors see only limited cause for concern because, at the AMCs with which the authors are familiar, any monetary surplus generally remains within the research enterprise to cover unanticipated budget shortfalls or to support research staff in the future during lean times. In addition, the surplus from research budgets is not shared directly with individual investigators. However, further investigation is needed to determine whether practices outside AMCs pose greater concerns.

AB - Paying more for clinical research than the cost of doing the work may create a conflict of interest that could lead to overzealous recruitment, putting participants and scientific integrity at risk. Thus, although various policies prohibit "finder's fees" simply for recruiting patients, paying the actual costs for research is permissible. Whereas industry-sponsored research routinely pays for the costs of each patient enrolled, the line between reasonable and excessive costs merits more attention. In academic medical centers (AMCs), institutional review boards and conflict of interest committees usually are not involved in reviewing research budgets to determine whether per capita payments are excessive. Also, the costs for clinical services in research are not standardized. Instead, budgets are negotiated both internally, among departments within research institutions, and externally, between researchers and sponsors. Sometimes, rates paid by sponsors exceed what researchers usually receive or are actually paid for particular services, generating a surplus. Nevertheless, the authors see only limited cause for concern because, at the AMCs with which the authors are familiar, any monetary surplus generally remains within the research enterprise to cover unanticipated budget shortfalls or to support research staff in the future during lean times. In addition, the surplus from research budgets is not shared directly with individual investigators. However, further investigation is needed to determine whether practices outside AMCs pose greater concerns.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79958054259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79958054259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 20881671

VL - 85

SP - 1554

EP - 1556

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 10

ER -