ACAM — Candidate Evaluation Form Person Awards

Structured evaluation for person awards (e.g., Author / Physician / Researcher / Young Scientist of the Year). Evidence-based evaluation derived from ACAM-published works within the defined award year.

How to fill this form

1) Complete Eligibility (Section B) first. If any mandatory item is "No", stop and mark the candidate as Not Eligible.
2) Score domains using whole numbers (0–5). Select the score that best matches the guidance for each domain.
3) Provide objective justification (2–4 sentences). Focus on published work quality, reporting, ethics, and verified contribution.
4) Declare conflicts of interest (COI). If conflicted, choose Recused and do not score.
Guidance: This is an awards evaluation form (not peer review). It must remain confidential and should not be shared with candidates or authors.
Tip: Keep the candidate's ACAM article(s) open while scoring; avoid using popularity or metrics as primary determinants.

Scoring anchors (0–5)

0 Absent / serious flaws
1 Major weaknesses (limits validity)
2 Below average (notable concerns)
3 Adequate (minor limitations)
4 Strong (small issues only)
5 Outstanding (model example)
Metrics (citations/views) may be noted as supportive information but must not determine the decision alone.

Section A — Candidate identification

Use the official name as it appears in publications (if applicable).
If the same candidate is evaluated in multiple categories, use a separate form for each category.
Must match the award-year eligibility window.
Person awards must be grounded in ACAM-published work for the award year.

Section B — Eligibility checklist (mandatory)

If any mandatory item is "No", the candidate is not eligible and you must not proceed to scoring.
Eligibility item Selection
At least one ACAM publication within the award year
Candidate must have eligible ACAM work within the defined award year.
Ethics / consent / COI statements are complete (where applicable)
Required ethics approval and informed consent must be present where relevant; COI/funding disclosures must be complete.
No unresolved integrity concerns
No ongoing ethics investigation; no retraction; no unresolved serious correction related to integrity.
Authorship / contributions appear consistent
Contributions (ICMJE/CRediT) should be consistent; avoid suspected gift/honorary authorship.

Section C — Scoring (Total 100)

Score each domain from 0–5 (whole numbers). Weighted points are calculated as (Score/5) × Weight.
Domain Weight Score (0–5) Guidance (what to consider)
Scientific contribution & originality 20 Novelty, importance of the research/clinical question, contribution to the field based on ACAM-published work.
Methodological quality 20 Appropriate design, bias control, statistical correctness, reproducibility, robustness of methods.
Reporting & transparency 15 Completeness and clarity of reporting (CONSORT/PRISMA/STROBE/CARE as applicable), clear tables/figures, adequate detail.
Ethics & publication integrity 20 Ethics/consent/COI transparency, honest limitations, no integrity red flags across eligible ACAM work.
Verified contribution (authorship consistency) 15 Consistency of ICMJE/CRediT contributions, clarity of candidate's role (e.g., first/corresponding author), no gift authorship concerns.
Clinical/academic impact 10 Practical relevance, educational value, influence on future research. Metrics can support but must not dominate.
Total (max 100)
Compute as (Score/5)×Weight and sum across domains.
0
Avoid personal remarks. Refer to methods, results, reporting quality, ethical transparency, and verified contribution.

Section D — Conflict of interest (COI) & Recusal

Examples: same institution, recent collaboration, supervisory relationship, financial ties, close personal relationships.
If "Yes", leave Section C scores blank and explain briefly below.
This form is intended for ACAM Awards Selection Committee internal use only. External sharing is not permitted.
Confirm Report Submission

You are about to finalize and submit this evaluation report.

The following actions will be performed:

  • A PDF report will be generated with your evaluation
  • The report will be automatically archived to the secure system

Please ensure all information is correct before proceeding.

Report Submitted Successfully

Your evaluation report has been successfully submitted!

Thank you for your evaluation.