Does size matter? Salience of follow-up payments in drug abuse research

IRB Ethics and Human Research

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 15-19

  Croft, Jason R ^a   Festincer, David S ^a   Dugosh, Karen L ^d   Marlowe, Douglas B ^b   Rosenwasser, Beth J ^c  

^a Section on Law and Ethics

^b Law and Ethics Research

^c TREATMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REIMBURSEMENT; RESEARCH SUBJECT; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; REIMBURSEMENT, INCENTIVE; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 34547651018     PISSN: 01937758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Coen AS, Patrick DC, Shern DL. Minimizing attrition in longitudinal studies of special populations: An integrated management approach. Evaluation and Program Planning 1996;19:309-319;
2. Josephson E., Rosen MA. Panel loss in a high school drug study. In D.B. Kandel (ed.), Longitudinal Research on Drug Use: Empirical Findings and Methodological Issues. New York: Wiley, 1978, 115-133.
3. Hansen WB, Tobler NS, Graham JW. Attrition in substance abuse prevention research: A meta-analysis of 8 5 longitudinally followed cohorts. Evaluation Review 1990;14:677-685.
4. Kleber H, D'Aunno T Large-scale evaluations of substance abuse treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 62nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence San Juan, PR, 2001.
5. Cook TD, Campbell DT QuasiExperimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1979.
6. Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Dugosh KL, et al. Adapting judicial supervision to the risk level of drug offenders: Discharge and six-month outcomes from a prospective matching study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, in press.
7. Campbell D, Stanley J. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1963; See ref. 4, Cook and Campbell 1979.
8. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979.
9. Higgins ST, Budney AJ, Bickel WK, et al. Incentives improve outcome in outpatient behavioral treatment of cocaine dependence. Archives of General Psychiatry 1994;551:568576;
10. Kirby KC, Marlowe DM, Festinger DS, et al. Schedule of voucher delivery influences initiation of cocaine abstinence. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 1998; 66:761-767.
11. Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Croft JR, et al. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug & Alcohol Dependence 2005;8:275-281.
12. See ref. 9, Festinger et al. 2005.
13. Brown GS, White KG. On the effects of signaling reinforcer probability and magnitude in delayed matching to sample. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 2005;83(2):119-128;
14. Nevin JA. Response strength in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1974;21:389-408.
15. See ref. 9, Festinger et al. 2005.
16. MacKinnon DP, Taborga MP, Morgan-Lopez AA. Mediation designs for tobacco prevention research. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2002;68:S69-S83;
17. MacKinnon DP, Dwyer JH. Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review 1993;17:144-158.
18. See ref. 9, Festinger et al. 2005.
19. Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent research: A systematic review. JAMA 2004;292:1593-1601.
20. McCrady BS, Bux Jr. DA, Ethical issues in informed consent with substance abusers. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 1999;67:186-93.