Relative efficacy of cash versus vouchers in engaging opioid substitution treatment clients in survey-based research

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 253-256

  Topp, Libby ^a   Islam, M Mofizul ^b   Day, Carolyn Ann ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPIATE SUBSTITUTION TREATMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH SUBJECT; SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFIT;

ADULT; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW SOUTH WALES; OPIATE SUBSTITUTION TREATMENT; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 84875580689     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100884     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Fry CL, Ritter A, Baldwin S, et al. Paying research participants: a study of current practices in Australia. J Med Ethics 2005;31:542-7.
2. Marsh A, Loxley W. Coffee shops and clinics: the give and take of doing HIV/AIDS research with injecting drug users. Aust J Public Health 1992;16:182-7.
3. Dickert N, Emanuel E, Grady C. Paying research subjects: an analysis of current policies. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:368-73.
4. Reiser SJ. Research compensation and the monetarization of medicine. JAMA 2005;293:613-14.
5. Fry CL, Hall W, Ritter A, et al. The ethics of paying drug users who participate in research: a review and practical recommendations. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2006;1:21-36.
6. Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Croft JR, et al. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug Alcohol Depend 2005;78:275-81.
7. Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Dugosh KL, et al. Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow-up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion. Drug Alcohol Depend 2008;98:128-135.
8. Emanual EJ. Ending concerns about undue inducement. J Law Med Ethics 2004;32:100-5.
9. Slomka J, McCurdy S, Ratliff EA, et al. Perceptions of financial payment for research participation among African-American drug users in HIV studies. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22:403-1409.
10. Fry C, Dwyer R. For love or money? An exploratory study of why injecting drug users participate in research. Addiction 2001;96:1319-25.
11. Dempsey JP, Back SE, Waldrop AE, et al. The influence of monetary compensation on relapse among addicted participants: empirical versus anecdotal evidence. Am J Addict 2008;17:488-90.
12. Dyer P. Druggies paid to talk. Northern Territory News 10 May 2005.
13. McDougall L. Plan to pay drug addicts for methadone study condemned as 'unethical'. Scotland on Sunday 29 July 2001.
14. Ritter A, 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 of Drug Policy 2003;14:1-3.
15. Australian Injecting and Illicit Drug Users League (AIVL). National Statement on ethical issues for research involving injecting/illicit drug users. Canberra: Australian Injecting and Illicit Drug Users League (AIVL), 2003.
16. National Health and Medical Research Council. National Statement on ethical conduct in human research. Canberra: Australian Government, 1997.
17. Halpern SD. Financial incentives for research participation: empirical questions, available answers and the burden of further proof. Am J Med Sci 2011;342:290-3.
18. Hope V, Judd A, Hickman M, et al. HIV prevalence among injecting drug users in England and Wales 1990 to 2003: evidence for increased transmission in recent years. AIDS 2005;19:1207-14.
19. Fisher CB. Ethics in drug abuse and related HIV risk research. Appl Dev Sci 2004;8:91-103.
20. Rosado J, Sigmon SC, Jones HE, et al. Cash value of voucher reinforcers in pregnant drug-dependent women. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2005;13:41-7.
21. Darke S, Hetherington K, Ross J, et al. Non-injecting routes of administration among entrants to three treatment modalities for heroin dependence. Drug Alcohol Rev 2004;23:177-83.
22. Gossop M, Griffiths P, Powis B, et al. Severity of dependence and route of administration of heroin, cocaine and amphetamines. Br J Addict 1992;87:1527-36.
23. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. National opioid pharmacotherapy statistics annual data collection: 2010 report. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2011.
24. Vandrey R, Bigelow GE, Stitzer ML. Contingency management in cocaine abusers: a dose-effect comparison of goods-based versus cash-based incentives. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2007;15:338-43.
25. Islam MM, Topp L, Conigrave KM, et al. The reliability of sensitive information provided by injecting drug users in a clinical setting: clinician-administered versus audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI). AIDS Care 2012;24:1496-503.
26. Darke S. Self-report among injecting drug users: a review. Drug Alcohol Depend 1998;51:253-63