A A A

Evaluation criteria

Bernard and Francine Dorval / William E. Rawls Prizes (early career prizes):

Nominees will be evaluated according to the criteria described below.

Overall contributions to cancer research and potential to lead to (or evidence of having led to) improved cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatments, care, support or cancer control will be considered.

Circumstances which may have impacted the nominee’s academic career progression and research productivity are taken into consideration, including but not limited to:
  • Additional training requirements and career interruptions (personal (including ‘two-body’ problem in academia*), family responsibilities, medical leaves, etc.) contributing to a non-linear or unconventional career trajectory
  • Inequitable distribution of institutional resources including start-up packages, laboratory or office space and formal mentorship
  • Historical policies and procedures that perpetuate biases in hiring, tenure and promotion
  • Biases in assignment of authorship roles in publications (e.g. first and last author roles)
  • Underrepresentation of individuals from the four designated groups (women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities) among conference keynote speakers and/or panelists and invited lecturers

Expectations for excellence will be commensurate with the research discipline and relative career stage of the nominee.

Criteria:

  • Research productivity: nominee’s publication record in peer-reviewed journals, quality and type of scholarly work published, degree of contribution, number of citations, and continuity of publication production (barring any interruptions); other forms of research outputs including, but not limited to, conference proceedings, policy reports, patents, and commercialization products.
  • Research grant funding: as the lead investigator and as part of multi-investigator teams (noting that multi-investigator teams may require additional time/effort to generate successful outcomes); nominee’s role(s) and potential impact of contribution(s) to the team will be considered. 
  • Fellowships, honours, and/or awards received by the nominee; scope and relevance (i.e. provincial, national, or international) of distinctions received will be considered. 
  • Training the next generation of researchers: relative to career stage and other considerations (career interruptions, for example), evidence of participation in a meaningful way and to an appropriate degree towards the mentorship and support of trainees and fellows; evidence that trainees and fellows have been subsequently recognized for excellence themselves. 
  • Contributions made to date to scientific discipline: details of these and how critical they are/have been for advancing the knowledge in their immediate research field and the general scientific body of cancer research; potential for future contributions based on track record will be considered. 
  • Evidence (potential) of (for) leadership on a national and international scale: senior author publications in high quality journals (and citations thereof); success in securing peer-reviewed research funding as a lead investigator; invitations to present at national and international conferences; participation on peer review panels and other professional contributions; community outreach; forging national and international collaborations; and importantly, impact (or likelihood of impact) on cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, care and/or support in the Canadian population and internationally.

View the nominee rating scale for the Bernard and Francine Dorval & William E. Rawls Prizes (early career)

 

Robert L. Noble / O. Harold Warwick Prizes (established career prizes):

Nominees will be evaluated according to the criteria described below.

Overall contributions to cancer research and the significance of their accomplishments to cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, care, support or cancer control in Canada and internationally will be considered.

Circumstances which may have impacted the nominee’s academic career progression and research productivity are taken into consideration, including but not limited to:

  • Additional training requirements and career interruptions (personal (including ‘two-body’ problem in academia*), family responsibilities, medical leaves, etc.) contributing to a non-linear or unconventional career trajectory
  • Inequitable distribution of institutional resources including start-up packages, laboratory or office space and formal mentorship
  • Historical policies and procedures that perpetuate biases in hiring, tenure and promotion
  • Biases in assignment of authorship roles in publications (e.g. first and last author roles)
  • Underrepresentation of individuals from the four designated groups (women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities) among conference keynote speakers and/or panelists and invited lecturers

Criteria:

  • Research productivity and outputs: nominee’s publication record in peer-reviewed journals, quality and type of scholarly work published, degree of contribution, number of citations, and continuity of publication production (barring any interruptions); other forms of research outputs including, but not limited to, conference proceedings, policy reports, patents, and commercialization products.
  • Research grant funding: as the lead investigator and as part of multi-investigator teams (noting that multi-investigator teams may require additional time/effort to generate successful outcomes); nominee’s role(s) and potential impact of contribution(s) to the team will be considered. 
  • Honours, and/or awards received by the nominee: scope and relevance (i.e. provincial, national, or international) of distinctions received will be considered. 
  • Training the next generation of researchers: relative to career stage and other considerations (career interruptions, for example), evidence of participation in a meaningful way and to an appropriate degree towards the mentorship and support of trainees and fellows; evidence that trainees and fellows have been subsequently recognized for excellence themselves and/or gone on to realize cancer research impacts themselves 
  • Contributions/discoveries made to cancer research: details of these and how critical they have been for advancing knowledge both in their immediate research field and for the general scientific body of cancer research; the importance of resulting impacts on cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, care, support or cancer control in Canada and internationally will be considered. 
  • Evidence of leadership on a national and international scale: recognition as an expert by peers, senior author publications in high quality journals, success in securing peer-reviewed research funding as a lead investigator, invitations to present at national and international conferences, participation on peer review panels, editorial boards and other professional contributions, community outreach, national and international collaborations will be considered; and importantly, demonstrated impact on cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, care and/or support in the Canadian population and internationally.

View the nominee rating scale for the Robert L. Noble & O. Harold Warwick Prizes (established career)

 

Canadian Cancer Society Lifetime Contribution Prize (established career prize):

Nominees will be evaluated according to the criteria described below.

Primary consideration will be given to the nominee’s contributions to cancer research that extend beyond traditional research accomplishments and outputs to have a significant impact on the Canadian cancer research ecosystem.

Circumstances which may have impacted the nominee’s academic career progression and research productivity are taken into consideration, including but not limited to:

  • Additional training requirements and career interruptions (personal (including ‘two-body’ problem in academia*), family responsibilities, medical leaves, etc.) contributing to a non-linear or unconventional career trajectory
  • Inequitable distribution of institutional resources including start-up packages, laboratory or office space and formal mentorship
  • Historical policies and procedures that perpetuate biases in hiring, tenure and promotion
  • Biases in assignment of authorship roles in publications (e.g. first and last author roles)
  • Underrepresentation of individuals from the four designated groups (women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities) among conference keynote speakers and/or panelists and invited lecturers

Criteria:

  • Contributions to the Canadian cancer research ecosystem, and internationally, as applicable: vision and leadership in building networks, fostering collaborations, developing resources and infrastructure, and other contribution(s) that have/has significantly enhanced the cancer research ecosystem in Canada and internationally. The degree to which these contributions have impacted those affected by cancer, in Canada and internationally, as applicable, will be considered.
  • Other considerations (to a lesser degree) include:
    • research productivity and outputs: publication record in peer-reviewed journals, quality and type of scholarly work published, degree of contribution, number of citations, and continuity of publication production (barring any interruptions); other forms of research outputs including, but not limited to, conference proceedings, policy reports, patents, and commercialization products
    • research grant funding: as the lead investigator and as part of multi-investigator teams (noting that multi-investigator teams may require additional time/effort to generate successful outcomes); the nominee’s role(s) and potential impact of contribution(s) to the team. 
    • honours, and/or awards: scope and relevance (i.e. provincial, national, or international) of distinctions received will be considered. 
    • training the next generation of researchers: relative to career stage and other considerations (career interruptions, for example), evidence that the nominee participates in a meaningful way and to an appropriate degree towards the mentorship and support of trainees and fellows; evidence that trainees and fellows have been subsequently recognized for excellence themselves, including securing academic positions in cancer research 
    • participation on peer review panels, editorial boards and other professional contributions, as well as community outreach and advocacy

View the nominee rating scale for the Canadian Cancer Society Lifetime Contribution Prize (established career)

 

Canadian Cancer Society Inclusive Excellence Prize (any career stage prize):

Nominees will be evaluated according to the criteria described below.

Demonstrated leadership in the advancement of equity, diversity and inclusion leading to significant, measurable improvements in the diversity of Canada’s cancer research ecosystem will be considered.

Circumstances which may have impacted the nominee’s career progression and research productivity (where applicable) are taken into consideration, including but not limited to:

  • Additional training requirements and career interruptions (personal (including ‘two-body’ problem in academia*), family responsibilities, medical leaves, etc.) contributing to a non-linear or unconventional career trajectory
  • Inequitable distribution of institutional resources including start-up packages, laboratory or office space and formal mentorship
  • Historical policies and procedures that perpetuate biases in hiring, tenure and promotion
  • Biases in assignment of authorship roles in publications (e.g. first and last author roles)
  • Underrepresentation of individuals from the four designated groups (women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities) among conference keynote speakers and/or panelists and invited lecturers

Criteria:

  • Demonstrated leadership in the advancement of equity, diversity and inclusion as it relates to the Canadian cancer research ecosystem including but not limited to: administrative/committee work; development and implementation of programs/strategies/policies; and/or recruitment, training and mentorship activities
  • Evidence of impact: measurable (i.e. tangible) improvements in the diversity of Canada’s cancer research landscape as a result of nominee’s efforts in fostering inclusive excellence

View the nominee rating scale for the Canadian Cancer Society Inclusive Excellence Prize (any career stage)

* Refers to dual-academic couples facing the challenge of both individuals obtaining desirable positions within a reasonable commuting distance.

Last modified on: October 1, 2020