Paying substance abusers in research studies: Where does the money go?

American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 43-48

  Festinger, David S ^a   Dugosh, Karen Leggett ^a  

^a TREATMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Monetary incentives; Participant payment; Remuneration; Substance abuse research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUBJECT; SELF REPORT; SUBSTANCE ABUSE;

DRUG USERS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MOTIVATION; REMUNERATION; RESEARCH; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 84857574599     PISSN: 00952990     EISSN: 10979891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/00952990.2011.563337     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Lovato LC, Hill K, Hertert S, Hunningshake B, Probstfield JL. Recruitment for controlled clinical trials: Literature summary and annotated bibliography. Control Clin Trials 1997; 18(4):328-252.
2. Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R, Felix LM, Pratap S. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (3). DOI: 10.1002/14651858. MR000008.pub4.
3. Mapstone J, Elbourne D, Roberts I. Strategies to improve recruitment to research studies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (2). DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub3.
4. Watson JM, Torgerson DJ. Increasing recruitment to randomized trials: A review of randomized controlled trials. BMC Med Res Method 2006; 6:34.
5. Kirby KC, Benishek LA, Dugosh KL, Kerwin ME. Substance abuse treatment providers beliefs and objections regarding contingency management: Implications for dissemination. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006; 85(1):19-27. (Pubitemid 44376548)
6. Koocher GP. Questionable methods in alcoholism research. J Consult Clin Psych 1991; 59:249-255.
7. Ritter AJ, Fry CL, Swan A. The ethics of reimbursing injecting drug users for public health research interviews: What price are we prepared to pay? Int J Drug Policy 2003; 14(1):1-3. (Pubitemid 36332159)
8. Sieber JE, Sorenson JL. Ethical issues in community based research and intervention. In Methodological Issues in Applied Social Psychology, (vol. 2), Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues. Edwards J, Tinsdale RS, Heath L, Prosavac EJ, eds. New York: Plenum Press, 1992; 43-64.
9. Ashery RS, McAuliffe WE. Implementation issues and techniques in randomized trials of outpatient psychosocial treatments for drug abusers: Recruitment of subjects. Am J Drug Alcohol Ab 1992; 18(3):305-329.
10. Scott CK. A replicable model for achieving over 90% follow up rates in longitudinal studies of substance abusers. Drug Alcohol Depend 2004; 74(1):21-36. (Pubitemid 38457050)
11. Hansten ML, Downey L, Rosengren DB, Donovan DM. Relationship between follow up rates and treatment outcomes in substance abuse research: More is better but when is "enough" enough? Addiction 2000; 95(9):1403-1416.
12. Coen AS, Patrick DC, Shern DL. Minimizing attrition in longitudinal studies of special populations: An integrated management approach. Eval Program Plann 1996; 19:309-319. (Pubitemid 126403438)
13. Josephson E, Rosen MA. Panel loss in a high school drug study. In Longitudinal Research on Drug Use: Empirical Findings and Methodological Issues. Kandel DB, ed. New York: John Wiley, 1978; 115-133.
14. Hansen WB, Tobler NS, Graham JW. Attrition in substance abuse prevention research: A meta-analysis of 85 longitudinally followed cohorts. Evaluation Rev 1990; 14:677-685.
15. Bale RN. The validity and reliability of self-reported data from heroin addicts: Mailed questionnaires compared with face-toface interviews. Int J Addict 1979; 14(7):993-1000. (Pubitemid 10164030)
16. Gould LC, Lukoff I. Selecting a study design. In Conducting Follow-Up Research on Drug Treatment Programs. Johnston LD, Nurco DN, Robins LN, eds. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1977, (DHEW Publication No. ADM 77-487) 29-46.
17. Polich JM, Armor DJ, Braiker HB. The Course of Alcoholism: Four Years after Treatment. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1980.
18. Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1979.
19. Campbell D, Stanley J. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1963.
20. Festinger 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. (Pubitemid 40694049)
21. Fry C, Dwyer R. For love or money? An exploratory study of why injecting drug users participate in research. Addiction 2001; 96:1319-1325. (Pubitemid 32835709)
22. Rosenheck R. Disability payments and chemical dependence: Conflicting values and uncertain effects. Psychiatr Serv 1997; 48:789-791. (Pubitemid 27232876)
23. Shaner A, Eckman TA, Roberts LJ, Wilkins JN, Tucker DE, Tsuang JW, Mintz J. Disability income, cocaine use, and repeated hospitalization among schizophrenic cocaine abusers: A government-sponsored revolving door. New Engl J Med 1995; 333:777-783.
24. Dickert N, Grady C. What's the price of a research subject? Approaches to payment for research participation. New Engl J Med 1999; 341:198-203. (Pubitemid 29325751)
25. Macklin R. "Due" and "undue" inducements: On paying money to research subjects. IRB 1981; 3:1-6.
26. McGee G. Subject to payment? J Am Med Assoc 1997; 278:199-200.
27. Cottler LB, Compton WM, Keating S. What incentives are effective rewards for hidden populations interviewed as part of research projects? Public Health Rep 1995; 110:178.
28. Lamb RJ, Iguchi MY, Kirby KC Effects of target criteria and reinforcement magnitude in reinforcing reduced breathe CO levels in smokers not receiving treatment. In Problems of Drug Dependence 1994: Proceedings of the 56th Annual Scientific Meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence.
29. Stitzer ML, McCaul ME, Bigelow GE, Liebson IA. Oral methadone self-administration: Effects of dose and alternative re-enforcers. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1983; 34(1): 29-35. (Pubitemid 13073298)
30. Festinger 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 Depen 2008; 96:128-135.
31. Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Lee PA, Dugosh KL, Benasutti KM. Matching judicial supervision to clients' risk status in drug court. Crime Delinquency 2006; 52:52-76. (Pubitemid 43058884)
32. Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Dugosh KL, Arabia PL, Kirby KC. An effectiveness trial of contingency management in a felony pre-adjudication drug court. J Appl Behav Anal 2008; 41:565-577.
33. Dempsey JP, Back SE, Waldrop AE, Jenkins L, Brady KT. The influence of monetary compensation on relapse among addicted participants: Empirical vs. anecdotal evidence. Am J Addict 2008; 17(6):488-490.
34. Vandrey R, Bigelow GE, Stitzer ML. Contingency management in cocaine abusers: A dose-effect comparison of goods-based versus cash-based incentives. Exp Clin Psychopharm 2007; 15(4):338-343. (Pubitemid 47445261)
35. Heil SH, Johnson MW, Higgins ST, Bickel WK. Delay discounting in currently using and currently abstinent cocaine-dependent outpatients and non-drug using matched controls. Addict Behav 2006; 31:1290-1294.
36. Kirby KN, Petry NM. Heroin and cocaine abusers have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than alcoholics or non-drug-using controls. Addiction 2004; 99:461-471. (Pubitemid 38496662)
37. Kirby KN, Petry NM, Bickel WK. Heroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls. J Exp Psychol: Gen 1999; 128:78-87.