Characteristics of HIV cure-related clinical trials affecting study participation: A choice-based conjoint analysis experiment

Cash incentives are widely used in clinical research to support recruitment and retention, yet their ethical implications, particularly in high-risk settings such as HIV cure-related studies, remain inadequately understood. This study examined how key stakeholders perceive participant payment relative to other study characteristics when deciding whether to participate in HIV cure research. Using a choice-based conjoint (CBC) experiment, we assessed preferences among people living with HIV (PLWH), HIV researchers, and Institutional Review Board (IRB) members/bioethicists. Participants (N=88) completed eight choice tasks involving hypothetical HIV cure study scenarios varying across six attributes: incentive amount, invasiveness, requirement to pause HIV medications, time commitment, first-in-human status, and cost reimbursement. Across all participants, payment amount emerged as the most influential attribute (29.3%), followed by procedure invasiveness (22.3%) and the requirement to pause HIV medication (17.6%). The highest hypothetical payment level ($200 per visit) was significantly preferred. However, subgroup analyses revealed important differences: PLWH prioritized payment most strongly, whereas researchers and IRB members/bioethicists placed greater emphasis on minimizing invasiveness. The requirement to pause HIV medication was a salient concern across groups, though relatively more influential for IRB members/bioethicists than for PLWH. Time commitment and ancillary cost reimbursement had comparatively lower impact on decision-making. These findings highlight the central role of financial incentives in shaping willingness to participate in HIV cure research, raising ethical considerations regarding potential undue influence, especially in higher-risk studies. At the same time, stakeholders value minimizing procedural risks and disruptions to treatment. This study underscores the need for clearer guidance on appropriate payment practices and for balancing incentives with ethical safeguards, particularly in trials involving antiretroviral therapy interruption.