What factors guide the award of increased costs for an unproven allegation?

In College of Physicians and Surgeons v. J.H., 2009 ABQB 48 at para. 27, 3 Alta L.R. (5th) 333, this court held that the following seven factors should guide the discretion to award increased costs for unproven allegations: (a) The nature of the allegation made, and whether the particular circumstances of the party against whom the allegation was made were such as to make the implication of the allegation more serious. (b) What, if any, information supportive of the allegation was known to the party making the allegation. (c) The strength and reliability of that information as it was known, or should have been known, by the party making the allegation. (d) The steps taken by the party making the allegation to verify the information upon which the allegation was based. (e) When the information was made known to the party making the allegation, whether additional information subsequently became known, and whether the allegation was modified, or withdrawn, to reflect the new information. (f) The timeliness of any such modification or withdrawal. (g) Whether the party making the allegation knew, or should have reasonably known, the allegation's implications for the party against whom it was made.