The Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics at Loyola University

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 Art Caplan One of the Smartest People on the Planet?
Discovering Minds Want to Know...

Check out this update from the University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics noting that Arthur Caplan has been recognized by Discover Magazine. The article... (more)

Brain Ethics Comes to the Nation's Capital

This Thursday and Friday, November 13th and 14th, the Neuroethics Society will meet in Washington DC at the AAAS Headquarters. According to Martha Farah, Communications... (more)

"Odd" Baby Play = Autism?

A recent study published by the UC Davis MIND Institute has found that infants who repetitively play with toys by spinning them or rattling them... (more)

Crestor for All?

It turns out that not just the high cholesterol crowd benefits from the use of anti-cholesterol medications, in this case Crestor, says Bloomberg. Recent studies... (more)

Caplan on Change Coming for Stem Cells

Arthur Caplan is conjecturing that the battle over stem cells may be coming to an end with the coming Obama administration, on MSNBC.com. Full-text of... (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