Under the management of the Committee for Scientific Affairs and Awards
+ AIMS (click to open/close)
To honour ESPID members for high quality publications in Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal (PIDJ) and to strengthen the relationship between the journal and ESPID. One award per year for which, applicants will be invited to apply. Please do not apply for this award unless you have been formally invited to do so.
+ ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA (click to open/close)
- The publication needs to constitute original work research (not literature reviews, opinion or perspective articles)
- Papers published in PIDJ, in the calendar year preceding the award are eligible - papers e-published but not fully published in that year will have to wait for following year’s award.
- Current PIDJ editorial Board and ESPID Board members are not eligible to apply for this award
+ AWARD (click to open/close)
- At the time of being offered the award successful candidates will be invited to attend that year's ESPID Annual Meeting with registration, travel and accommodation being offered (if already registered, this will be refunded). Please be aware the travel and accommodation are subject to ESPID Rules and maximum amounts apply
- Recipients will be invited to make a brief presentation during the "Best of ESPID" session at the Annual ESPID Meeting
- An editorial commendation from the Chief Editor of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal in an issue following the award
ESPID will only support one award relating to any one project. If you feel you have a project which more than one award would cover you should select and apply to only one ESPID award. If you have other awards/grants which are pending or have been recently funded, you must indicate this in your application and clearly state what support has been requested/agreed and when a decision is expected.
+ CRITERIA FOR SELECTING THE BEST APPLICANT (click to open/close)
All eligible applications will be judged against the following criteria by the ESPID Committee for Scientific Affairs and Awards (weighting as shown.
1. Clinical and/or Research Impact: Does this substantially advance the field of research? (0–5)
|
Score
|
Criteria
|
|
0
|
No identifiable clinical relevance; findings unlikely to influence practice now or in the future./No meaningful contribution; confirms well-established knowledge without added insight.
|
|
1
|
Minimal clinical relevance; hypothesis-generating only with no clear pathway to practice./Limited contribution; minor incremental knowledge or methodological weaknesses limit impact.
|
|
2
|
Potential future relevance, but indirect; requires substantial further evidence before affecting care. Adds some new data or perspective, but the impact is confined to a narrow area.
|
|
3
|
Moderate clinical relevance; may inform guidelines, risk stratification, or decision-making in selected settings. Solid contribution; advances understanding, generates new hypotheses, or fills an important gap.
|
|
4
|
High clinical relevance; likely to influence practice, guidelines, or management in the short-medium term. Major contribution; significantly advances the field or challenges existing paradigms.
|
|
5
|
Immediate and substantial impact on clinical care; practice-changing or guideline-altering. Transformative impact: reshapes research direction, introduces novel concepts, or sets new standards.
|
2. Overall Significance to the Broader Field of Paediatric Infectious Diseases: How important is this work to PID overall? (0–5)
|
Score
|
Criteria
|
|
0
|
Not relevant to paediatric infectious diseases.
|
|
1
|
Marginal relevance; niche topic with limited applicability.
|
|
2
|
Relevant to a specific subpopulation or narrow clinical context.
|
|
3
|
Clearly relevant to Paeds ID; applicable to multiple settings or populations.
|
|
4
|
Highly relevant; addresses a common, high-burden, or priority issue in Paeds ID.
|
|
5
|
Critical significance: addresses a major unmet need, global priority, or foundational issue in Paeds ID.
|
o
3. Type of Study: Study design hierarchy (0–5)
|
Score
|
Study Type
|
|
0
|
Case report/case series
|
|
1
|
Ecological study/Animal Studies
|
|
2
|
Cross-sectional study
|
|
3
|
Retrospective cohort study OR meta-analysis/systematic review with quantitative synthesis, scoping reviews included (not narrative review)
|
|
4
|
Prospective cohort study
|
|
5
|
Randomised controlled trial
|
+ APPLICATION PROCEDURE (click to open/close)
All eligible nominations received by the PIDJ editorial Board will be considered by the Committee for Scientific Affairs and Awards who will make the final decision by vote. When the successful nominee has been identified, he/she will be informed by the ESPID Secretary by email as soon as possible before the meeting to facilitate travel plans.
