2025 Call for Applications is now open
Summer Student Research Award
Driving Clinical and Academic Excellence is a significant focus of RVH’s Vitally You strategic plan. The RVH Research Institute is committed to supporting the scholarly development of Canadian students or students enrolled in Canadian universities or colleges.
The RVH Summer Student Research Award is a competitive award that enables successful students to engage in an immersive summer research training experience intended to supplement and give practical meaning to their academic coursework. Successful candidates will be eligible to receive up to $7,500.00 for a full sixteen (16)-week period.
ELIGIBILITY
Applicant’s must be students actively enrolled in a bachelors, graduate, or professional degree program (e.g., BSc, BME, MSc, MPH, MD, PharmD). Students who are transitioning between two distinct post-secondary degree programs during the time of the award are also eligible to apply. Students who are unable to identify a supervisor may be placed on a waiting list.
Please see the 2025 RVH Summer Student Research Award’s Terms and Conditions for full eligibility criteria
2025 DATES AND DEADLINES
Call for Applications: Tuesday, December 24, 2024
Waitlist Deadline: Monday, February 14, 2025
Application Deadline: Monday, March 3, 2025
Award Decision: week of Monday, March 31, 2025

Reflections from Our Research Alumni
-
Does RVH have policies related to the conduct of clinical trials?Yes, RVH is a member of the Network of Networks (N2) a pan Canadian, non-profit organization dedicated to helping member sites conduct clinical trials at the highest level. RVH has adopted N2 Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for all research activities; these SOPs are approved by Health Canada.
-
Does my quality improvement project require review?In general, projects that are considered quality improvement/quality assurance (QI/QA) or are for program evaluation do not require ethics approval. However, when there is doubt as to whether or not the activity meets the definition of research involving humans, the researcher must confirm with the RVH REB Chair as to whether ethics approval is required. The intent to publish does not necessarily distinguish an activity as research, since findings from QA/QI and program evaluation projects may be published. Please note, the REB will not provide ethics approval retroactively; the onus is on the researcher to obtain the necessary approvals. For more information about differences between QA/QI and research, please contact Jesse McLean, RVH Research Manager, at mcleanje@rvh.on.ca or (705) 728-9090 Ext. 41350.
-
Is the submission deadline for full board review flexible?Permission must be obtained from the RVH REB Chair in order for the REB to review any submissions after the deadline for the upcoming full board meeting. Please contact REB Coordinators Romaine Miller or Debra Pietersen at research@rvh.on.ca to inquire about submitting after the deadline.
-
Do I need to include a copy of my ethics certification and curriculum vitae with my REB submission?Yes. Investigators wishing to conduct research at RVH must submit a copy of their ethics certification and curriculum vitae for each new REB submission.
-
Are there different types of ethics review?Yes. The RVH REB adopts a proportionate approach to research ethics review in accordance with TCSP2 Article 6.12. Based on the outcomes of a risk analysis that takes into consideration the study population, the extent and likelihood of a participant experiencing harm, and the type of risk, research submissions will be stratified into those requiring full board review and those that may be delegated: 1. Full-Board Review -greater than minimal risk studies -30-90 day turn-around for review -reviewed by all REB members at monthly full-board meeting -full-board review is the default requirement unless delegated review is authorized by the Chair 2. Delegated Review (formerly known as Expedited Review): -acceptable level of minimal risk -no therapeutic intervention (e.g., surveys, focus groups, retrospective chart review) -30 day turn-around for review -reviewed by a single REB member or group of REB members All reviewed studies will be given one of the following designations: Approved, Conditionally Approved (approval dependant on fulfillment of revision requirements), or Denied.
-
I would like to try a new clinical procedure that is not standard treatment. Do I need ethics approval?Medical professionals have an obligation to set standards and improve quality of care. Research Ethics Boards do not have the capacity to oversee the protection of patients that are not participants in research. Studying quality and outcomes does not always equal research. Innovative Therapy refers to new medical and surgical techniques, procedures, or interventions that have not yet been introduced at the hospital as standard treatment but may have been reported elsewhere. If the intention of the procedure is strictly therapeutic, Innovative Therapies may be employed when: 1) Standard approaches have failed; or 2) When no standard treatment is known; and 3) There is evidence elsewhere that the novel therapy may have efficacy or benefit to the patient. In such cases the procedure may be administered on an emergency basis only and may be attempted with only one or two patients (often referred to as “compassionate” treatment). If the Innovative Therapy is used on 3 or more patients, the procedure should become the object of a research protocol and, therefore, subject to REB review. Use of the therapy shall be discontinued until it receives REB approval. Physicians who wish to introduce an Innovative Therapy strictly for clinical reasons must submit an “Enabling Innovation Letter” to the Chief of Staff (copied to the Clinical and Administrative Directors of the impacted departments, as well as the Research Ethics Board Chair). The Enabling Letter should be shared with the REB Chair, who will advise if research ethics review is required. Innovative Therapy Requests that are deemed to be “research” will be referred to a full-board of the REB for ethics review, by the REB Chair. Where the Chief Medical Executive determines that the therapy described in the Enabling Letter is in fact innovative, he or she may do one of the following: 1) Approve the innovative use with or without restrictions; 2) Grant clinical evaluation status for six to twelve months; 3) Request that the innovative use be continued only through a study protocol approved by the REB; or 4) Deny the request as submitted. Requests for Innovative Therapy that are approved by the Chief Medical Executive shall be conducted in accordance with the Enabling Letter and be subject to any requirements placed upon the Innovator by the Chief Medical Executive. All innovative outcomes shall be reported to the Chief Medical Executive, the Clinical and Administrative Directors of the impacted department and the REB Chair, without delay.