Erratum: Regulating the market in human research participants (PLoS Medicine 3,8, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030330);Regulating the market in human research participants

PLoS Medicine

Volumn 3, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 1237-1241

  Lemmens, Trudo ^a   Miller, Paul B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; COMPENSATION; DRUG COST; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG MARKETING; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATIENT SAFETY; PRESCRIPTION; REVIEW; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ECONOMICS; ETHICS; GIFT GIVING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL ETHICS; NORTH AMERICA; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG INDUSTRY; ETHICS, CLINICAL; GIFT GIVING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; NORTH AMERICA; PATIENT SELECTION; THERAPEUTIC HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION;

EID: 33748349893     PISSN: 15491277     EISSN: 15491676     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030447     Document Type: Erratum

References (59)

1. Pitts G (2003 July 22) Biovail drug campaign causes dilemma in U.S. The Globe and Mail: B1.
2. Abboud L (2005 February 27) Regulators probe marketing incentives at ANS. The Wall Street Journal: A2.
3. Office of Inspector General, United States Department of Health and Human Services (2000) Recruiting human subjects: Pressures in industry-sponsored clinical research. Washington (D. C.): United States Department of Health and Human Services. Available: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-01-97-00195.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2006.
4. Ackerman TF (1989) An ethical framework for the practice of paying research subjects. IRB 11: 1-4.
5. Macklin R (1981) On paying money to research subjects: "Due" and "undue" inducements. IRB 3: 1-6.
6. McNeill P (1997) Paying people to participate in research: Why not? Bioethics 11: 390-396.
7. Wilkinson M, Moore A (1997) Inducement in research. Bioethics 11: 373-389.
8. Dickert N, Grady C (1999) What's the price of a research subject? Approaches to payment for participation. N Engl J Med 341: 198-203.
9. Lemmens T, Elliott C (1999) Guinea pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects. Account Res 7: 3-20.
10. Larkin M (1999) Clinical trials: What price progress? Lancet 354: 1534.
11. Health Canada Publications (2001) Regulations amending the food and drug regulations (1024-clinical trials). Ottawa: Health Canada Publications. Available: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/compli-conform/clini-pract-prat/reg/ 1024_e.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
12. Bodenheimer T (2000) Uneasy alliance - Clinician investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med 342: 1539-1544.
13. Light DW, Lexchin J (2004) Will lower drug prices jeopardize drug research? A policy fact sheet. Am J Bioethics 4: W1-W4.
14. Maresky N (2003) Evaluating your performance metrics and ensuring continuous improvement with effective benchmarking [presentation]. Streamlining and Accelerating Your Clinical Trials; 24-25 March 2003; Toronto, Canada.
15. Goldner JA (2000) Dealing with conflicts of interest in biomedical research: IRB oversight as the next best solution to the abolitionist approach. J Law Med Ethics 28: 379-404.
16. Morin K, Rakatansky H, Riddick FA Jr, Morse LJ, O'Bannon JM 3rd, et al. (2002) Managing conflicts of interest in the conduct of clinical trials. JAMA 287: 78-84.
17. Healy D, Cattell D (2003) Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. Br J Psychiatry 183: 22-27.
18. Kalb PE, Koehler KG (2002) Legal issues in scientific research. JAMA 287: 85-91.
19. Otto MA (2003 February 6) Researchers under investigation for VA drug study deaths in New York. Medical Research Law & Policy Report. Available: http://www.sskrplaw.com/bioethics/researchersinvestigation.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
20. [No authors listed] (2003 February 6) VA medical center probed on clinical trial deaths. Reuters Health eLine. Available: http://sci.rutgers.edu/ forum/archive/index.php/t-2062.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
21. [No authors listed] (2003 May 28) Federal agents query VA staff. Albany Times Union: A1.
22. Pair R (2003 April 13) U.S. to review research at hospitals for veterans nationwide. The New York Times: 24. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/ 13/national/13VETS.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
23. Sontag D (2005 February 6) In harm's way: Abuses endangered veterans in cancer drug experiments. The New York Times: 1. Available: http://www.nytimes. com/2005/02/06/nyregion/06vets.html?ex=1265432400&en=8fe07dd58bf0215a& ei=5088&. Accessed 15 June 2006.
24. Vertanen M (2005 November 21) Ex-VA researcher sentenced in drug scandal. WJLA News. Available: http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1105/279747.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
25. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2004) Notice of initiation of disqualification proceeding and opportunity to explain (NIDPOE). Available: http://www.fda.gov/foi/nidpoe/n32l.htm. Accessed 22 June 2006.
26. Lemmens T (2005) Leopards in the temple: Restoring scientific integrity to the commercialized research scene. J Law Med 32: 641-657.
27. Baird P (2003) Getting it right: Industry sponsorship and medical research. CMAJ 168: 1267-1269.
28. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association (2000) Fee splitting: Referrals to health care facilities (Opinion E-6.03). In: Code of Medical Ethics: Current Opinions. Chicago: American Medical Association. Available: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/8366.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
29. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association (1994) Finder's fees: Payment for the referral of patients to clinical research. Chicago: American Medical Association.
30. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association. Conflicts of interest: Biomedical research (Opinion E-8.031). In: Code of Medical Ethics: Current Opinions. Chicago: American Medical Association. Available: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/8470.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
31. Canadian Medical Association (2001) Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry. Ottawa: Canadian Medical Association. Available: http://policybase. cma.ca/policypdf/PD01-10.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
32. University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine (2003) Policy on the offer and acceptance of finders fees or completion fees in research involving human subjects. Available: http://www.facmed.utoronto.ca/scripts/index_.asp?action= 31&U_ID=0&N_ID=13&P_ID=9976. Accessed 22 June 2006.
33. University of Washington (2002) Policy prohibiting the use of enrollment incentives in human subjects research. Available: http://www.washington.edu/ research/osp/enrollment.html. Accessed 15 June 2006.
34. University of Rochester Office of Research and Project Administration (2002) University of Rochester policy on enrollment incentive payments by or to university clinical trial researchers. Available: http://www.rochester.edu/ORPA/ policies/incenpay.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
35. University of Tennessee (1991) Finder's fees. Available: http://www.utmem.edu/policies/w932_document_show.php?p=237. Accessed 15 June 2006.
36. Wayne State University (2001) Finder's fee policy. Available: http://www.hic.wayne.edu/hicpol/finders.htm. Accessed 15 June 2006.
37. McCrary SV, Anderson CB, Jakovljevic J, Khan T, McCullough LB (2000) A national survey of policies on disclosure of conflicts of interest in biomedical research. N Engl J Med 343: 1621-1626.
38. Moore v. Regents of the University of California. 793 2.Pd 479 (Cal. 1990).
39. United States District Court, S.D. Florida, Miami Division (2003) Greenberg v. Miami Children's Hospital Research Institute. Wests Fed Suppl 264: 1064-1078.
40. Lemmens T, Miller PB (2003) The human subjects trade: Ethical and legal issues surrounding recruitment incentives. J Law Med Ethics 31: 398-418.
41. Fabrikant R, Kalb PE, Hopson MD, Bucy PH (2002) Health care fraud: Enforcement and compliance. New York: Law Journal Press. 1000 p.
42. Choudhry S, Choudhry NK, Brown AD (2004) Unregulated private markets for health care in Canada? Rules of professional misconduct, kickbacks to physicians and physician self-referral in Canada. CMAJ 170: 1115-1118.
43. U.S. House of Representatives (2001) Anti-Kickback Statute. 42 United States Code: 1320a-1327b. Available: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+ 42USC1320a-7b. Accessed 15 June 2006.
44. California Business and Professions Code, Section 650. Available: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group= 00001-01000&file=650-657. Accessed 22 June 2006.
45. Kalb PE, Koehler KG (2002) Legal issues in scientific research. JAMA 287: 85-91.
46. Davis K, Roy J (1998) Fraud in the Canadian courts: An unwarranted expansion of the scope of the criminal sanction. CBLJ 30: 210-238.
47. AAMC Task Force on Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Research (2003) Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress I: Policy and guidelines for the oversight of individual financial interests in human subjects research. Acad Med 78: 225-236.
48. AAMC Task Force on Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Research (2003) Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress II: Principles and recommendations for oversight of an institution's financial interests in human subjects research. Acad Med 78: 237-245.
49. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2004) Financial relationships and interests in research involving human subjects: Guidance for human subject protection. Washington (D. C.): United States Department of Health and Human Services. Available: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/finreltn/ fguid.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
50. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (1998) Institutional review boards: A time for reform. Washington (D. C.): United States Department of Health and Human Services. Available: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-01-97-00193.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
51. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (2001) Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants. Bethesda (Maryland): National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Available: http://www.georgetown.edu/research/ nrcbl/nbac/human/overvol1.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2006.
52. Institute of Medicine (2002) Integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. Washington (D. C.): National Academies Press. 216 p. Available: http://www.nap.edu/books/0309084792/html/. Accessed 16 June 2006.
53. Lemmens T, Freedman B (2000) Ethics review for sale? Conflict of interest and commercial research review boards. Milbank Q 78: 547-584.
54. Lemmens T, Thompson A (2001) Noninstitutional commercial review boards in North America: A critical appraisal and comparison with IRBs. IRB 23: 1-12. Available: http://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/Lemmens/noninstitutionalboards. pdf. Accessed 16 June 2006.
55. Krimsky S (2003) Science in the private interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted biomedical research? Lanhan (Maryland): Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 264 p.
56. Angell M (2004) The truth about the drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House. 305 p.
57. Ray WA, Stein CM (2006) Reform of drug regulation - Beyond an independent drug-safety board. NEJM 354: 194-201.
58. Petryna A (2005) Ethical variability: Drug development and globalizing clinical trials. Amer Ethnol 32: 183-197.
59. Lemmens T, Waring DR (2006) Law and ethics in biomedical research: Regulation, conflict of interest, and liability. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. pp. 132-179.