The Need to Track Payment Incentives to Participate in HIV Research

A taxing problem: The impacts of research payment practices on participants and inclusive research

Empirical data regarding payments to participants in research is limited. This lack of information constrains our understanding of the effectiveness of payments to achieve scientific goals with respect to recruitment, retention, and inclusion. We conducted a content analysis of consent forms and protocols available on clinicaltrials.gov to determine what information researchers provide regarding payment. We extracted data from HIV (n = 101) and NIMH-funded studies (n = 65) listed on clinicaltrials.gov that had publicly posted a consent form. Using a manifest content analysis approach, we then coded the language regarding payment from the consent document and, where available, protocol for purpose and method of the payment. Although not part of our original planned analysis, the tax-related information that emerged from our content analysis of the consent form language provided additional insights into researcher payment practices. Accordingly, we also recorded whether the payment section mentioned social security numbers (or other tax identification number) in connection with payments and whether it made any statements regarding the Internal Revenue Service or the tax status of payments. We found studies commonly offered payment, but did not distinguish between the purposes for which payment may be offered (i.e., compensation, reimbursement, incentive, or appreciation). We also found studies that excluded some participants from receiving payment or treated them differently from other participants in the study. Differential treatment was typically linked to US tax laws and other legal requirements. A number of US studies also discussed the need to collect Social Security numbers and income reporting based on US tax laws. Collectively, these practices disadvantage some participants and may interfere with efforts to conduct more inclusive research.

Compensating patients in trials: Perspectives from an ethical committee versus sponsor

BACKGROUND

According to European clinical research legislation, no undue influence, including financial incentives, should be used to encourage participation in clinical trials. Financial compensation should be based on the inconvenience experienced by patients and is determined by the sponsor.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess the adequacy of patients' financial compensation by obtaining an external ethical opinion compared to the actual compensation provided.

METHODS

We randomly selected and reviewed 50 clinical drug trials, including 25 academic and 25 industry-sponsored studies. An external ethics group consisting of three members from French ethics committees, blinded to the actual compensation and the sponsor, retrospectively reviewed the study characteristics and assessed whether financial compensation was appropriate. Cohen's Kappa test measured agreement between actual compensation and the ethics group's opinion, and the McNemar test measured discrepancies.

RESULTS

There was no agreement between the actual financial compensation and the ethics group's opinion (K = -.07; 95% CI = [-.16-.02]). More discrepancies were found in favour of financial compensation according to the ethics group than provided by sponsors (12 vs. 2, p = .016). The ethics group recommended financial compensation in 12 out of 50 studies (24%), which were studies with a higher number of additional visits (p = .004) and were more frequently sponsored by industry (p = .008). Sponsors only provided financial compensation in 2 out of 50 studies (4%).

CONCLUSION

Patients are rarely compensated despite the perceived inconvenience. Both sponsors and ethics members struggle to determine the need for financial compensation, indicating a need for more precise recommendations for both parties.

Perceptions of Risks and Benefits of Participating in HIV Cure-Related Research Among Diverse Young Adults Living with HIV in the United States: Qualitative Research Findings

In the United States, young adults have the highest rates of new HIV infections, and are less likely to be aware of their infection, be engaged in care, or achieve HIV viral suppression. As biomedical HIV research increasingly focuses on achieving long-term suppression without antiretroviral therapy (ART) and finding an HIV cure, little is known about perceptions of young adults living with HIV (YLWH) regarding HIV cure research. We recruited a diverse sample of 20 YLWH (18-29 years old) to participate in individual semistructured qualitative interviews to explore knowledge and perceptions of HIV cure research, and motivations and barriers to participation. Most participants had little knowledge of HIV cure research. Motivators of HIV cure research participation included altruism, stigma reduction, and the elimination of the clinical burdens of HIV. Barriers included potential physical side effects, psychological distress, the possibility of disclosure as a result of participating, and the amount of time required to participate. Most participants had concerns about analytic treatment interruptions (i.e., ART interruption to assess HIV remission), and indicated that they would want more frequent laboratory testing and protection for their sex partners during this time. Finally, participants suggested that, if other YLWH are considering participation in cure research, they should first learn as much as possible about the research, and then consider the potential personal benefits and the contribution that they could make to science and their communities. As HIV cure research advances, the participation of YLWH will be critical. Our study provides knowledge about how YLWH view HIV cure research. More sociobehavioral research is needed to ensure that those who are most likely to be the decision-makers and beneficiaries of an HIV cure are included at all levels of research.

Evaluating the Impact of Incentives on Clinical Trial Participation: Protocol for a Mixed Methods, Community-Engaged Study

BACKGROUND

Monetary incentives in research are frequently used to support participant recruitment and retention. However, there are scant empirical data regarding how researchers decide upon the type and amount of incentives offered. Likewise, there is little guidance to assist study investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) in their decision-making on incentives. Monetary incentives, in addition to other factors such as the risk of harm or other intangible benefits, guide individuals' decisions to enroll in research studies. These factors emphasize the need for evidence-informed guidance for study investigators and IRBs when determining the type and amount of incentives to provide to research participants.

OBJECTIVE

The specific aims of our research project are to (1) characterize key stakeholders' views on and assessments of incentives in biomedical HIV research; (2) reach consensus among stakeholders on the factors that are considered when choosing research incentives, including consensus on the relative importance of such factors; and (3) pilot-test the use of the guidance developed via aims 1 and 2 by presenting stakeholders with vignettes of hypothetical research studies for which they will choose corresponding incentive types.

METHODS

Our 2-year study will involve monthly, active engagement with a stakeholder advisory board of people living with HIV, researchers, and IRB members. For aim 1, we will conduct a nationwide survey (N=300) among people living with HIV to understand their views regarding the incentives used in HIV research. For aim 2, we will collect qualitative data by conducting focus groups with people living with HIV (n=60) and key informant interviews with stakeholders involved in HIV research (people living with HIV, IRB members, and biomedical HIV researchers: n=36) to extend and deepen our understanding of how incentives in HIV research are perceived. These participants will also complete a conjoint analysis experiment to gain an understanding of the relative importance of key HIV research study attributes and the impact that these attributes have on study participation. The data from the nationwide survey (aim 1) will be triangulated with the qualitative and conjoint analysis data (aim 2) to create 25 vignettes that describe hypothetical HIV research studies. Finally, individuals from each stakeholder group will select the most appropriate incentive that they feel should be used in each of the 25 vignettes (aim 3).

RESULTS

The stakeholder advisory board began monthly meetings in March 2021. All study aims are expected to be completed by December 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

By studying the role of incentives in HIV clinical trial participation, we will establish a decision-making paradigm to guide the choice of incentives for HIV research and, eventually, other types of similar research and facilitate the ethical recruitment of clinical research participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04809636; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04809636.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/33608.

Participant Perspectives and Experiences Entering an Intensively Monitored Antiretroviral Pause: Results from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5345 Biomarker Study

The AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) A5345 study included an intensively monitored antiretroviral pause (IMAP), during which a cohort of participants temporarily stopped antiretroviral treatment during chronic HIV infection. We surveyed participant perceptions and understanding of A5345 using a cross-sectional sociobehavioral questionnaire. Participants completed the baseline questionnaire either before or after initiating the study's IMAP. Questionnaire responses were linked to existing demographic data. Quantitative responses were analyzed overall and stratified by IMAP status. Open-ended responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Thirty-two participants completed the baseline sociobehavioral questionnaire. Half (n = 16) completed it before (i.e., pre-IMAP initiation group) and half (n = 16) after IMAP initiation (i.e., post-IMAP initiation group). Eight pre-IMAP initiation respondents (50%) and 11 post-IMAP respondents (69%) responded "yes" when asked if they perceived any direct benefits from participating in A5345. Perceived societal-level benefits included furthering HIV cure-related research and helping the HIV community. Perceived personal-level benefits included the opportunity to learn about the body's response to IMAP and financial compensation. The majority of respondents-13 from each group (81% of each)-reported risks from participation, for example, viral load becoming detectable. A5345 participants perceived both societal- and personal-level benefits of study participation. While the majority of survey respondents perceived participatory risks, nearly one in five did not. Key messages pertaining to study-related risks and benefits may need to be clarified or reiterated periodically throughout follow-up in HIV cure-related studies with IMAPs. Clinical Trail Registration Number: NCT03001128.

Retaining diverse adults with diabetes in a long-term trial: Strategies, successes, and lessons learned

Background Retention can be difficult in longitudinal trials, especially among minoritized groups and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) who may experience more barriers to research participation. Organized retention strategies may help; however, limited research has reported on this in detail. Methods We employed several strategies throughout a 15-month randomized controlled trial to encourage retention among a diverse sample of adults with type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized to receive mobile health support for diabetes self-care for 12 months or an attention control. Participants completed assessments at 3, 6, 12, and 15 months post-baseline. We used three main categories of retention strategies: flexibility in participation (e.g., multiple methods for data collection), communication (e.g., tracking contacts), and community building (e.g., study branding, newsletters). We monitored participants' use of strategies and examined associations between participant characteristics and retention. Results Retention remained high (≥90%) at each follow-up assessment. Participants used various methods for survey completion: online (34%), in-person (31%), and mail (30%). Most (73%) used a mail-in A1c kit at least once. Multiple completion methods were important for retaining minoritized and lower SES participants who completed assessments in-person more frequently. Communication also facilitated retention; 39% of participants used a study Helpline and tracking systems helped maintain contact. Conclusions Retaining disadvantaged patients in clinical trials is necessary so findings generalize to and can benefit these populations. Retention strategies that reduce barriers to participation and engage participants and community partners can be successful. Future studies should assess the impact of retention strategies.

Recruitment of US Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA) into Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Related Behavioral Research Studies: A Scoping Review

Purpose of Review

The objective of this scoping review was to examine the range of published evidence on recruitment approaches and outcomes of US adolescents and young adults (AYA) ages (18–29 years) into human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–related behavioral research studies during the past 10 years.

Recent Findings

Implementation of effective behavioral research strategies among HIV at-risk and infected AYA is key to ending the HIV epidemic and necessitates successful recruitment strategies.

Summary

A comprehensive search was executed across four electronic databases. Of the 1697 identified studies, seven met inclusion criteria with six of these seven directed to HIV prevention. Most studies used online recruitment as part of a hybrid strategy, and combined field-based/in-person and online methods. Recruitment strategies and outcomes, resources and compensation, procedures for consent, and timelines varied among all seven studies. Our results highlight the need for development of recruitment models in alignment with behavioral strategies aimed to treat and prevent HIV among US AYA.

Participant Perspectives in an HIV Cure-Related Trial Conducted Exclusively in Women in the United States: Results from AIDS Clinical Trials Group 5366

Women remain underrepresented in HIV research. The AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) 5366 study was the first HIV cure-related trial conducted exclusively in women. Our multidisciplinary team integrated participant-centered reports into the ACTG 5366 protocol to elicit their perspectives. We nested mixed-methods surveys at the enrollment and final study visits to assess ACTG 5366 participants' perceptions and experiences. Of 31 participants enrolled in the ACTG 5366, 29 study agreed to complete the entry questionnaire and 27 completed the exit survey. The majority of study participants were nonwhite. We identified societal and personal motivators for participation, understanding of risks and benefits, and minor misconceptions among some trial participants. Stigma was pervasive for several women who joined the study, and served as a motivator for study participation. Reimbursements to defray costs of study participation were reported to facilitate involvement in the trial by about one-third of participants. Almost all respondents reported positive experiences participating in the ACTG 5366 trial. The ACTG 5366 study showed that it is possible to recruit and retain women in HIV cure-related research and to embed participant-centered outcomes at strategic time points during the study. The findings could help in the design, implementation, recruitment, and retention of women in HIV cure-related research and highlight the value of assessing psychosocial factors in HIV cure-related research participation.

Conditional economic incentives to improve HIV prevention and treatment in low-income and middle-income countries

New and innovative approaches are needed to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of HIV in low-income and middle-income countries. Several trials use conditional economic incentives (CEIs) to improve HIV outcomes. Most CEI interventions use a traditional economic theory approach, although some interventions incorporate behavioural economics, which combines traditional economics with insights from psychology. Incentive interventions that are appropriately implemented can increase HIV testing rates and voluntary male circumcision, and they can improve other HIV prevention and treatment outcomes in certain settings in the short term. More research is needed to uncover theory-based mechanisms that increase the duration of incentive effects and provide strategies for susceptible individuals, which will help to address common constraints and biases that can influence health-related decisions.