{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010683760683760684, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010683760683760685, 'mean_word_length': 5.506944444444445, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Do participants who are harmed in research face too many barriers to claiming compensation?

It is accepted that participants in research should be compensated for any undue harm they suffer as a result of participation. Ensuring that appropriate insurance systems are in place to provide compensation or treatment to the research participant in the event of injury, disability or death attributable to participation is the responsibility of research ethics committees.1 But how does an ethics committee know whether the sponsor’s insurance arrangements are adequate or appropriate? This article describes two different systems of insurance that may be available to compensate participants. It is difficult to know whether these systems work well for participants as little information is available about successful claims or the experience of claiming. However, we do know that in making claims participants face considerable barriers.