Something to Declare...But No One Cares

bribe.jpgDisclosing financial conflicts of interest to potential research subjects does not effect their willingness to participate in research, found a recent Johns Hopkins, Duke, and Wake Forest University study. In fact, the effects of such disclosures upon potential research participants were minimal, except in one group--the participants told that the researchers owned stock in the company doing the research.

These possible research participants, asked about a hypothetical trial in this study, really only cared about one thing--trust. Trust in the institution and the researchers mattered much more to all three groups of study participants than whether any kind of potential conflict was disclosed.

Amazingly, the group who was told that the researchers were paid on a per capital recruitment basis believed that made the investigators motivated to do good research, not motivated merely to enroll more people in the study.

What this goes to show clearly is that trust trumps all in decisions to participate in research--and this fact means that the responsibility of researchers is even greater to ensure that disclosures are made and that trust is not violated. Non-disclosure of potential financial or other conflicts of interest, even if research participants would still choose to participate otherwise, undermines the entire research enterprise and ultimately will erode all trust in the institution and the investigator.

I agree with Dr. Sugarman's claim that patients have a "right to know" prior to giving consent to participate in research and such disclosures, even if they make no difference in the ultimate outcome of whether persons participate in research are the duty of all investigators.

But be prepared, investigators, if you own stock--you may get a few more prospective participants declining than you might otherwise.

Summer Johnson, PhD

contribute a comment

Your contributions to the conversation are very much appreciated. We do have a few simple guidelines, though. Be civil. Stay on topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that violate the aforementioned guidelines. One more thing: comments are moderated, so it may take a little while for your comment to be posted. Thanks.

what is this?

A 'Nature Top 50' science blog by the editors, staff and friends of The American Journal of Bioethics. Science writes: "To follow the latest twists in ... science stories with social impact, dive into this Web log"

The original story behind this blog

What people are saying about blog.bioethics.net

recently on blog.bioethics.net

Is Hope a Culprit in Cancer Clinical Trials?

A recent study conducted by Emory University School of Medicine found that therapeutic misconception is alive and well in Phase I cancer research. According to... (more)

Gingrich on IVF: Bad for Families, Bad for Bioethics

Scientists, reproductive specialists and andrologists had better prepare. If Newt Gingrich has his way (and wins the Presidency), he will have a whole new world... (more)

Canadians have Bieber Fever...For Organ Donation

Yes, it's true. Bieber Fever has spread far and wide. But it isn't just tweens who are following the pop star, Justin Bieber's, every move.... (more)

Caplan: Say No to Sterilization, Forced Abortion

Art Caplan discusses a troubling case regarding a 32-year-old pregnant woman known as "Mary Moe" who is pregnant for the third time and who suffers... (more)

Rallying Around Amelia: A Debate on Disability

The blogosphere and the airwaves are filled with indignation regarding what has happened to Amelia Rivera, a three year old who has a rare genetic... (more)

this blog's feed

  • Subscribe
    • XML
    • Google Reader or Homepage
    • Add to My Yahoo!
    • Subscribe with Bloglines
    • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
    • Add to My AOL
    • Convert RSS to PDF
    • Add to Technorati Favorites!
    • Add to your phone
    • Get RSS Buttons

info

archives

tags