Stanford University Office of the Dean of Research

  Human Research Protection Program (HRPP)

DOMAIN II: RESEARCH COMPLIANCE OFFICE, INCLUDING IRBs

Chapter 10:  Participant Recruitment and Selection

The STANFORD* IRBs and their staff systematically evaluate recruitment and participant selection practices.  (AAHRPP Standard II-5) 

10.1      Equitable Selection

 

The IRB evaluates equitable selection of participants from various populations and sub-populations, when applicable, and consider whether inclusion and exclusion criteria impose fair and equitable burdens and benefits.  (AAHRPP Element II.5.A) 

Guidance and information is made available to Protocol Directors (PDs) to assist and guide them in creating recruitment and participant selection methods that are fair and equitable.

See     - Recruitment

-   Advertisements: Appropriate Language for Recruitment Material

-   Chapter 14.4.

PDs are directed to enter detailed information on how participants will be identified and recruited in response to questions in the Protocol Application.  PDs are required to identify the target populations (including age range, gender, ethnic background), the inclusion and exclusion criteria and whether payments will be made for participation. In addition, PDs are required to justify the inclusion of targeted persons (e.g., healthy participants, employees, students or participants with certain medical conditions). The IRB evaluates this information in determining if the selection and recruitment of participants is equitable and that the study imposes fair and equitable burdens and benefits -  such that one group of persons does not disproportionately received the benefits compared to another group assuming only the risks. 

IRB staff and members review this information and confirm the recruitment and selection strategies are fair, equitable, and non-misleading.  If recruitment strategies fail to meet these requirements, the protocol will not be approved as written and the PD will be asked to modify the recruitment plan accordingly as a condition of approval.

 

Vulnerable Subjects

Investigators must provide a rationale for involvement of vulnerable subjects, such as children, prisoners, pregnant women, economically and educationally disadvantaged, decisionally impaired, and homeless people. The PD must substantiate his/her decision to involve a vulnerable population and further provide a rationale why a less vulnerable population would not serve the purpose of the research. When vulnerable populations will be targeted for enrollment, the IRB assesses the additional safeguards proposed by the PD to minimize the possible risks and the chance of harm to potentially vulnerable participants. While pregnant women are considered vulnerable participants, women of reproductive age should not be arbitrarily excluded from participation in research.  If women will be excluded, such exclusion must be fully justified by the PD based on scientific rationale.  The IRBs adhere to the following policy when considering women as participants – “Women as Subjects in Research,” Research Policy Handbook, RPH 7.2. 

 

Non-English Speaking Participants

Non-English speaking participants should not be systematically excluded because of language barriers.  The IRB encourages the inclusion of non-English speaking participants and permits such persons to be enrolled via the short form consent process consistent with 45 CFR 46.117(b)(2). 

 

10.2  Review of Recruitment Methods, Advertising Materials and Payment

 

The IRB reviews proposed participant recruitment methods, advertising materials, and participation payment arrangements, and permits them when fair, honest, and appropriate.  (AAHRPP Element II.5.B) 

 

Recruitment Methods

PDs are required to provide details on all methods of recruitment proposed on a project, including how participants will be identified for recruitment.  Guidance on recruitment is available, as well as sample phone screens when screening will be conducted over the phone to determine study eligibility.  Some common recruitment methods include recruiting from own clinic patients, seeking referrals from colleagues (via word of mouth or referral letters sent to colleagues) and advertisements.  

 

Advertisements

If recruitment will be by advertisement, the mode of advertisement (flyers, radio, newspaper, internet) and information contained in the advertisement must be approved by the IRB.  The IRB considers that advertisements begin the informed consent process and thus, consistent with the consent process, coercion and undue influence are prohibited during recruitment.  The IRB reviews advertising to ensure that advertisements do not imply a certainty of favorable outcome or other benefits beyond what is outlined in the consent document and the protocol.  See guidance Advertisements: Appropriate Language for Recruitment Material.

 

Telephone Screening

For protocols involving telephone screening of participants in response to an advertisement, the IRB generally requires investigators to review all the elements of informed consent orally with prospective participants.  However, investigators may request a waiver of documentation of consent limited to the screening portion (only) of the protocol if they demonstrate that the screening procedure meets regulatory criteria in 45 CFR 46.117(c)(2) or 21 CFR 56.109(c)(1). 

 

Payment

PDs must disclose any proposed payments to participants in the protocol application form, including the method, type and timing of the payments. Payments to research participants may not be of such an amount as to result in coercion or undue influence on the research participant’s decision to participate.  If a study has multiple paid visits, payment should be prorated throughout the duration of the study to provide partial payment to persons who withdraw before completing the study.  See guidance Payment – Ethical Considerations.

 

Prohibited Recruitment and Payment Practices

The following activities are examined carefully and are generally not allowed:

·         Payment from research participants

·         Compensation for participation in the form of a coupon for a discount on the test article to be used after the product has been approved for marketing.

·          “Cold-calling” of potential research participants (i.e., unrelated party initiating telephone   contact based on knowledge of confidential information), unless the following preferred methods are unavailable and good reason exists:

-  Patients of a particular clinic, physician or other caregiver only after the patient’s physician or caregiver has previously notified the potential research participant (or parent or legal representative) and obtained approval for such contact.

-  Members of a program based in the community, workplace, school, trade or union only after a program representative has previously notified the potential research participant (or parent or legal representative) and obtained approval for such contact.

·         Exculpatory language through which the participant or participant’s LAR is made to waive or appear to waive any of the participant’s legal rights, or releases or appears to release the investigator , the sponsor, the institution or its agents from liability for negligence.

 

Payment Arrangement Among Sponsors/Organizations, Investigators and Others

Payment in exchange for referrals of potential participants (finder’s fees) and payments designed to accelerate recruitment tied to the rate or timing of enrollment (bonus payment) are generally unacceptable.

 

In some special circumstances Stanford contracts with organizations for a fee who have volunteer participants who have previously agreed to be study participants in survey studies.

 

 

Additionally for VA research - Payment Practices

The VA prohibits paying participants for participation in research when the research is integrated with a patient's medical care and makes no special demands on the patient beyond those of usual medical care.

 The VA permits paying participants when: 

        i.      The research is not directly intended to enhance the diagnosis or treatment of the medical condition for which the participant was being treated, and when the standard of practice in affiliated non-VA institutions is to pay participants in this situation.

      ii.      The research is a multi-institutional study and participants at collaborating non-VA institutions were paid for the same participation in the same study at the same rate proposed.

    iii.      In the opinion of the IRB, payment of participants is appropriate in other comparable situations.

     iv.      The participant will incur transportation expenses that would not be incurred in the normal course of receiving treatment and will not be reimbursed by another mechanism.