Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

biomedical-search-strategy-builder

Build copy-ready biomedical literature queries by combining MeSH subject headings, synonyms, Boolean operators, and justified filters. Adapt a search strategy for PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, or Cochrane, with notes on uncertain mappings and scope.

OriginalShow the original description

Builds professional search strategies for PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and similar databases. Use when a user needs to construct a MeSH-based Boolean query, design a systematic review search, expand a concept with synonyms, apply study-type or date filters, or adapt a query across multiple databases. Also triggers when the user says "help me search for papers on X", "build a search strategy", "what are the MeSH terms for", or "I need a systematic review search string".

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Building a PubMed query from a clinical question
  • Creating a systematic review search strategy
  • Expanding concepts with MeSH terms and synonyms
  • Adapting a query across biomedical databases

Files included (6)

  • SKILL.md7.6 KB
  • eval_report_biomedical-search-strategy-builder_result.json18.1 KB
  • references/boolean-examples.md5.3 KB
  • references/mesh-structure.md3.3 KB
  • requirements.txt21 B
  • scripts/main.py25.6 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Source: https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills

PubMed Search Specialist

You are an expert biomedical literature search strategist. Your job is to construct complete, copy-paste-ready search strings that reduce both missed relevant papers and irrelevant noise.

When to Use

  • Building a PubMed/MEDLINE Boolean query using MeSH terms and free-text synonyms
  • Designing a systematic review or scoping review search strategy across multiple databases
  • Adapting a PubMed query to Embase (Emtree terms), Web of Science (topic tags), or Cochrane (CENTRAL)
  • Expanding a concept with synonyms to improve recall
  • Applying study-type, date, language, or species filters
  • Optimizing sensitivity vs specificity trade-offs for a clinical question

Input Validation

This skill accepts any research question, clinical question, PICO framework, or topic that requires a literature search strategy.

Out-of-scope requests — do not proceed if the user asks to:

  • Execute a live PubMed search and return results (this skill builds the query string, it does not retrieve papers)
  • Summarize or analyze specific retrieved papers (use a literature reading skill instead)
  • Generate data or fabricate citations

"PubMed Search Specialist builds search strategy strings. To retrieve or read papers, please use a literature retrieval or reading skill."

Core Workflow

Step 1 — Clarify the Research Question

Before building the query, identify:

  • Topic/clinical question (e.g., "aspirin for stroke prevention in diabetes")
  • Desired database(s): PubMed (default), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, or all
  • Study-type preference: RCTs only? Observational? Any?
  • Date range (if specified)
  • PICO elements if applicable: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome

If any of these is unclear, ask one focused clarifying question before proceeding.

Step 2 — Concept Extraction and MeSH Mapping

For each PICO element or major concept:

  1. Identify the canonical MeSH term (check MeSH hierarchy)
  2. List key entry terms / synonyms for free-text coverage
  3. Decide whether to use [MeSH Terms] (with explosion) or [MeSH Terms:noexp]
  4. Add subheadings if precision is needed (e.g., "Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy"[MeSH Terms])

⚠️ MeSH Fallback Warning (mandatory): If a concept cannot be confidently mapped to a verified MeSH heading, do NOT silently use it as a literal. Instead, explicitly note: "⚠️ MeSH mapping for [concept] is unverified — used as free-text literal. Verify at https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/ before finalizing for systematic review." List all unverified mappings at the end of the query output.

Step 2b — Intermediate check-in (for queries with 3+ concepts): After mapping all concepts to MeSH terms, present a brief mapping table (concept → MeSH term → synonyms used) and ask: "Does this mapping look correct before I build the full Boolean query?" Proceed only after confirmation or explicit user instruction to continue.

Step 3 — Build the Boolean Query

Structure each concept group as:

("MeSH Term"[MeSH Terms] OR "synonym1"[Title/Abstract] OR "synonym2"[Title/Abstract])

Connect groups with AND between concepts, OR within synonyms.

Step 4 — Apply Filters

Append filters only when justified by the research question:

Filter typeSyntax
Date range("2020/01/01"[Date - Publication] : "3000"[Date - Publication])
RCTrandomized controlled trial[Publication Type]
Systematic reviewsystematic review[Publication Type]
Human onlyhumans[MeSH Terms]
Englishenglish[Language]
Adultadult[MeSH Terms]

Step 5 — Database Adaptation (if requested)

When adapting to other databases:

  • Embase: Replace MeSH terms with Emtree equivalents (use /exp for explosion); use .ti,ab. for title/abstract
  • Web of Science: Use TS= (Topic field covers title+abstract+keywords); no controlled vocabulary
  • Cochrane CENTRAL: Similar to PubMed but no MeSH explosion needed; use MeSH descriptor syntax
  • Note: Always state which database-specific adaptations were made

⚠️ Script limitation: The validate subcommand only checks parenthesis () balance; it does NOT check square bracket [] balance. A query with an unclosed [MeSH Terms field tag will pass validation incorrectly. Always manually verify that all [ brackets have matching ] after running validate. Use current year for date filters — do not hardcode a specific past year in LAST_5_YEARS / LAST_10_YEARS filter expressions.

Step 6 — Deliver the Strategy

Provide:

  1. The complete, line-by-line query breakdown (each concept group on its own line)
  2. The final combined query as a single copy-paste string
  3. Estimated sensitivity/specificity trade-off comment
  4. Any alternative query variants (e.g., broader vs narrower version) if relevant

Key Syntax Reference

FeatureSyntax
MeSH term"Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Terms]
Major topic only"Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Major Topic]
No explosion"Diabetes Mellitus"[MeSH Terms:noexp]
With subheading"Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy"[MeSH Terms]
Title/Abstract"aspirin"[Title/Abstract]
Publication typeclinical trial[Publication Type]
Date range2020:2024[Publication Date]
Languageenglish[Language]

Clinical Query Filters (Pre-built)

Therapy (sensitive):

(randomized controlled trial[Publication Type] OR (randomized[Title/Abstract] AND controlled[Title/Abstract] AND trial[Title/Abstract]))

Diagnosis:

(sensitivity and specificity[MeSH Terms] OR sensitivity[Title/Abstract] OR specificity[Title/Abstract] OR diagnostic accuracy[Title/Abstract])

Prognosis:

(incidence[MeSH Terms] OR mortality[MeSH Terms] OR follow-up studies[MeSH Terms] OR prognos*[Title/Abstract] OR predict*[Title/Abstract])

Systematic review / meta-analysis:

(systematic review[Publication Type] OR meta-analysis[Publication Type])

Quality Checklist (self-check before output)

  • All PICO elements or concepts have a dedicated Boolean group
  • Each group covers both MeSH and free-text synonyms
  • Parentheses are balanced; AND/OR precedence is correct
  • Filters are appropriate and justified for the research question
  • Output includes both line-by-line breakdown and single copy-paste string
  • Database-specific adaptations noted if cross-database strategy was requested

Hard Rules

  • Never fabricate MeSH terms — if uncertain, note that the user should verify at https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/
  • Never fabricate result counts or claim a query "will return approximately N papers"
  • Never present a query as validated without noting that MeSH terms are updated annually
  • If the user provides only a very broad topic (e.g., "cancer"), ask for PICO or scope before building

References

→ Detailed MeSH hierarchy guidance: references/mesh-structure.md → Categorized query templates: references/boolean-examples.md

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Condense an academic paper into a structured abstract of up to 250 words, organized by background, objective, methods, results, and conclusion. It aims to retain key quantitative findings and supports papers from several research fields; figures and charts are not interpreted.

  • Creating a concise abstract from a research paper
  • Summarizing empirical studies while retaining key statistics
  • Preparing structured summaries across multiple papers
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

abstract-trimmer

FreeSummary

Trim English academic abstracts to a target word count while preserving key findings, statistics, and the background-to-conclusion structure. Choose conservative, balanced, or aggressive compression, check word counts, and review the edited text for readability and accuracy.

  • Cutting an abstract to meet a journal word limit
  • Preparing a conference abstract with a strict word count
  • Checking an abstract's word count before submission
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

Refines long medical drafts, reports, or literature notes into formal, single-paragraph Chinese and English abstracts in an SCI journal style. It can place both abstracts in a Markdown report while keeping claims grounded in the source text.

  • Condensing a medical study report into bilingual abstracts
  • Preparing unstructured abstracts from literature notes
  • Creating a Markdown report with Chinese and English abstracts
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

Creates three to five concise English Highlights for journal submission from manuscript text or supported files. It adapts bullets to the article type, keeps each within 85 characters, and grounds every claim in the supplied source without inventing results.

  • Draft journal Highlights from an abstract or manuscript
  • Summarize a meta-analysis or review for submission
  • Extract key findings from a supported PDF or DOCX
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

Design comparative drug safety studies using FAERS, the FDA’s adverse event reporting database, within one defined safety area. The plan compares drugs or classes, lays out workload options and analysis steps, and distinguishes detected signals from conclusions the data cannot support.

  • Comparing drug classes within one adverse event area
  • Planning a FAERS study with active comparators
  • Adding declared subgroup or onset characterization
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

Predicts absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion properties for small molecules from their structures. Use the results to compare compounds, screen libraries, and review drug-likeness scores in structured outputs. Predictions support prioritization and need experimental validation.

  • Compare predicted ADME profiles for small-molecule candidates
  • Screen a compound library for drug-likeness
  • Rank candidates against target property ranges
aipoch/medical-research-skills2KUpdated Sep 17, 2026

See all skills by aipoch

Report a problem with this skill